Re: TOAST compression - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: TOAST compression
Date
Msg-id 20060226160046.GX82012@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to TOAST compression  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Responses Re: TOAST compression  ("Luke Lonergan" <llonergan@greenplum.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 09:39:34PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> It's true that LZ decompression is fast, so we should probably use the
> compressed version of the datum unless the reduction in size is very
> small. I'm not sure precisely what that threshold should be, however.

Any idea on how decompression time compares to IO bandwidth? In other
words, how long does it take to decompress 1MB vs read that 1MB vs read
whatever the uncompressed size is?
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Date:
Subject: Re: possible design bug with PQescapeString()
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: TOAST compression