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

Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?

From: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?
Date: 2009-01-03 05:17:16
Message-ID: 495EF4DC.3040802@esilo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas wrote:
> 
> Compression is
> generally bad for performance, though there are certainly exceptions.
> What it is good for is saving disk space, and that is why people use
> it.
> 

I don't think disk space is still the primary reason for using compression; 
shoot.. I can buy a terabyte drive for $150 on newegg and 1.5TB drives are out. 
  I think the primary reason has been slowly moving towards performance.  Fast 
downloads, compressed web sites or simply reading/writing less to/from disk are 
very common use cases for compression; all increase performance.  Basically, 
compression comonly offers faster data delivery.  As long as you utilize a fast 
compressor, like lzo or zlib "NOT level 9", its a performance win.

-- 
Andrew Chernow
eSilo, LLC
every bit counts
http://www.esilo.com/

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alex HunsakerDate: 2009-01-03 06:16:58
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-01-03 04:34:11
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?

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