Re: Table and Index compression

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Table and Index compression
Date: 2009-08-06 22:55:33
Message-ID: 4A7B5F65.5000709@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/6/09 1:03 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> One possibility is to handle only read-only tables. That would make
> things a *lot* simpler. But it sure would be inconvenient if it's only
> useful on large static tables but requires you to rewrite the whole
> table -- just what you don't want to do with large static tables -- to
> get the benefit.

Well less flexible, I could see combining this with partitioning to
still be useful. If we could rewrite specific partitions as compressed,
then there's a lot of cumulative data applications which it would benefit.

Not as exciting as being able to compress the whole thing, of course.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-08-06 23:08:27 Array detection in pg_dump
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-08-06 22:13:03 Re: compilation with libeditpreferred is broken