Luke Lonergan wrote: > Jim, > > On 2/26/06 10:37 AM, "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So the cutover point (on your system with very fast IO) is 4:1 > > compression (is that 20 or 25%?). > > Actually the size of the gzipp'ed binary file on disk was 65MB, compared to > 177.5MB uncompressed, so the compression ratio is 37% (?), or 2.73:1.
I doubt our algorithm would give the same compression (though I haven't really measured it). The LZ implementation we use is supposed to have lightning speed at the cost of a not-so-good compression ratio. > No, unfortunately not. O'Reilly's jobs data have 65K rows, so that would > work. How do we implement LZW compression on toasted fields? I've never > done it! See src/backend/utils/adt/pg_lzcompress.c -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
