Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> So it saves less than 3% disk space at the cost of about 9% performance
> loss.
>
> Uh ... isn't more TPS better?
> 9%, that is a dramatic difference.
Yup. I'm suspicious of it --- if the database is 3% smaller then I'd
believe a 3% performance gain from reduction of I/O, but I don't see
where 9% comes from.
regards, tom lane