Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Are there plans to add data compression feature to postgresql?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, 小波 顾 <guxiaobo1982(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman(at)gmail(dot)com>, chris(dot)ellis(at)shropshire(dot)gov(dot)uk, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Are there plans to add data compression feature to postgresql?
Date: 2008-10-30 22:41:51
Message-ID: 28357.1225406511@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
"Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> I can't really see trusting Postgres on a filesystem that felt free to
>> compress portions of it. Would the filesystem still be able to guarantee that
>> torn pages won't "tear" across adjacent blocks? What about torn pages that
>> included hint bits being set?

> I can't see PostgreSQL noticing it. PostgreSQL hands the OS a 512byte
> block, the OS compresses it and it's brethren as the go to disk,
> uncompresses as they come out, and as long as what you put in is what
> you get back it shouldn't really matter.

I think Greg's issue is exactly about what guarantees you'll have left
after the data that comes back fails to be the data that went in.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: ThomasDate: 2008-10-30 22:46:02
Subject: Re: a LEFT JOIN problem
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-30 22:40:10
Subject: Re: Decreasing WAL size effects

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group