| From: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Cc: | 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: | 2026-07-31 22:50:45 |
| Message-ID: | am0mxQtAsnwINgG7@msg.df7cb.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Re: Tomas Vondra
> Thanks. FWIW I've brought this up with the RMT, and there seem to be no
> objections to getting this done for PG19. Unless someone objects in the
> next couple days, I'll get it committed.
Thanks!
> AFAIK the algorithms make different trade offs - zstd tends to compress
> better, but uses (substantially) more CPU. I think it makes sense to
> default to lz4, it's clearly better than pglz, with low CPU usage.
Yes, lz4 makes sense to me now. zstd is the "can I tune it harder" pick.
Christoph
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2026-07-31 23:15:36 | Re: CREATE SUBSCRIPTION ... SERVER vs. pg_dump, etc. |
| Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2026-07-31 21:53:13 | Re: pg19b1: TRAP: failed Assert("pgstat_bktype_io_stats_valid(bktype_shstats, MyBackendType)") |