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

tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) writes:
> We already have the portions of this behavior that seem to me to be
> likely to be worthwhile (such as NULL elimination and compression of
> large field values). Shaving a couple bytes from a bigint doesn't
> strike me as interesting.

I expect that there would be value in doing this with the inet type,
to distinguish between the smaller IPv4 addresses and the larger IPv6
ones. We use the inet type (surprise! ;-)) and would benefit from
having it "usually smaller" (notably since IPv6 addresses are a
relative rarity, at this point).

That doesn't contradict you; just points out one of the cases where
there might be some value in *a* form of compression...

(Of course, this may already be done; I'm not remembering just now...)
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "cbbrowne.com")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/nonrdbms.html
Fatal Error: Found [MS-Windows] System -> Repartitioning Disk for
Linux...
-- <cbbrowne(at)hex(dot)net> Christopher Browne