On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Kevin Grittner<kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > >> What about setting "PGLZ_strategy_always" as the default strategy >> (insane cpu cost ?) ? >> Or something in-between ? > > That goes beyond what I was trying to do with my recent patch. What > you propose may be useful, but there would need to be much discussion > and benchmarking and it would be a new patch. > > If you have any benchmark information on relative speed and space > savings, please post them.
I will try that as soon as my spare production server (2x4core Xeon, 32GB RAM, 8 SAS Disk) is back to life. I wasn't thinking about the very aggressive (strategy_always) compression strategy for a default postgresql release. Not everyone is IObound :) But just as a default setting here at over-blog. (definitively IOBound with large articles and comment). Anyway, i will try and report different strategy here. Thank you again for your feedback. -- Laurent Laborde Sysadmin @ http://www.over-blog.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
