On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:26:38PM +0530, Rahila Syed wrote:
> >I am sorry but I can't understand the above results due to wrapping.
> >Are you saying compression was twice as slow?
>
> CPU usage at user level (in seconds) for compression set 'on' is 562 secs
> while that for compression set 'off' is 354 secs. As per the readings, it
> takes little less than double CPU time to compress.
> However , the total time taken to run 250000 transactions for each of the
> scenario is as follows,
>
> compression = 'on' : 1838 secs
> = 'off' : 1701 secs
>
>
> Different is around 140 secs.
OK, so the compression took 2x the cpu and was 8% slower. The only
benefit is WAL files are 35% smaller?
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
