| From: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Compression dictionaries for JSONB |
| Date: | 2023-02-09 10:50:57 |
| Message-ID: | CAJ7c6TMO7vCUewTVd-LHsFqE3YwNKP5nTzTVLe2LZwEZ5tzEuQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Andres,
> > So to clarify, are we talking about tuple-level compression? Or
> > perhaps page-level compression?
>
> Tuple level.
> although my own patch proposed attribute-level compression, not
> tuple-level one, it is arguably closer to tuple-level approach than
> page-level one
Just wanted to make sure that by tuple-level we mean the same thing.
When saying tuple-level do you mean that the entire tuple should be
compressed as one large binary (i.e. similarly to page-level
compression but more granularly), or every single attribute should be
compressed separately (similarly to how TOAST does this)?
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-02-09 10:55:22 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2023-02-09 10:42:36 | Re: [PATCH] Make ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING and ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE consistent |