| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: wal_compression=zstd |
| Date: | 2022-03-11 03:23:59 |
| Message-ID: | YirAz/JQ/re059t5@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 07:14:11AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Anyway there's no compelling reason to not use the default. If we were to use
> a non-default default, we'd have to choose between 1 and 2 (or some negative
> compression level). My thinking was that zstd-1 would give the lowest-hanging
> fruits for zstd, while minimizing performance tradeoff, since WAL affects
> interactivity. But choosing between 1 and 2 seems like bikeshedding.
Yeah, I have looked again at the patch today, and I saw no reason to
not apply it to give more options to the user as zstd or lz4 are both
good in their own ways. So done, with the default level used.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-03-11 03:30:31 | Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-03-11 02:52:49 | Re: pg_walinspect - a new extension to get raw WAL data and WAL stats |