On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut escribió:
>> James Mansion wrote:
>>> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>>>> c. Are there any well-known pitfalls/objections which would prevent
>>>>> me from
>>>>> changing the algorithm to something more efficient (read: IO-bound)?
>>>>
>>>> copyright licenses and patents
>>>>
>>> Would it be possible to have a plugin facility?
>>
>> Well, before we consider that, we'd probably want to see proof about the
>> effectiveness of other compression methods.
>
> I did some measurements months ago, and it was very clear that libz
> compression was a lot tighter than the PGLZ code.
we have seen amazing results with lzo compression...2-3x faster
compression times with only 10-15% less compression:
There are tons of supporting examples online, for example:
http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2005-October/008768.html
I think, if the database is automatically compressing things (which,
IMO, it shouldn't), a low cpu overhead algorithm should be favored.
merlin
