| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Cc: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL compression setting after PostgreSQL LZ4 default change |
| Date: | 2026-08-06 14:31:44 |
| Message-ID: | CAMT0RQS_d-29QS50SYH=u15tPWrnb45ahJwi+D-5Yo6phO4mTw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 2:11 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> wrote:
>
> The executive summary is that lz4/zstd perform about the same, but zstd
> has a clearly better compression ratio. I withdraw my initial plan to
> default to lz4, and I agree we should default to zstd. (By "default" I
> mean that "on" would use that algorithm, but the GUC would still default
> to 'off' as before. Maybe we should reconsinder that for PG20, though?)
Do you have any ideas why recovery on Azure is 10-20% faster for lz4
(and surprisingly also pglz) than for zstd ?
---
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2026-08-06 14:48:55 | Distinguish publication exclusions in object addresses |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2026-08-06 14:30:43 | Re: analyze-in-stages post upgrade questions |