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

Re: [PATCHES] Full page writes improvement, code update

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Koichi Suzuki" <suzuki(dot)koichi(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>,<pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Full page writes improvement, code update
Date: 2007-03-29 20:28:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:45 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:

> > OK, different question:
> > Why would anyone ever set full_page_compress = off?
> The only reason I can see is if compression costs us CPU but gains RAM & 
> I/O.  I can think of a lot of applications ... benchmarks included ... 
> which are CPU-bound but not RAM or I/O bound.  For those applications, 
> compression is a bad tradeoff.
> If, however, CPU used for compression is made up elsewhere through smaller 
> file processing, then I'd agree that we don't need a switch.

Koichi-san has explained things for me now.

I misunderstood what the parameter did and reading your post, ISTM you
have as well. I do hope Koichi-san will alter the name to allow
everybody to understand what it does.

  Simon Riggs             

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2007-03-29 20:42:33
Subject: Re: Modifying TOAST thresholds
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2007-03-29 20:25:12
Subject: Feature thought: idle in transaction timeout

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-03-29 22:06:33
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-03-29 20:24:53
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add CLUSTER table USING index (take 2)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group