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 <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
