Greetings,
* Merlin Moncure (mmoncure@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:26 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > Looks like a lot of the difference being seen and the comments made
> > about one being faster than the other are because one system is
> > compressing *everything*, while PG (quite intentionally...) only
> > compresses the data sometimes- once it hits the TOAST limit. That
> > likely also contributes to why you're seeing the on-disk size
> > differences that you are.
>
> Hm. It may be intentional, but is it ideal? Employing datum
> compression in the 1kb-8kb range with a faster but less compressing
> algorithm could give benefits.
Well, pglz is actually pretty fast and not as good at compression as
other things. I could certainly see an argument for allowing a column
to always be (or at least attempted to be) compressed.
There's been a lot of discussion around supporting alternative
compression algorithms but making that happen is a pretty big task.
Thanks!
Stephen
