On 06/07/2013 04:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> I mean, we don't necessarily need to make it configurable if we just add
> one canonical new "better" compression format. I am not sure that's
> sufficient since I can see usecases for 'very fast but not too well
> compressed' and 'very well compressed but slow', but I am personally not
> really interested in the second case, so ...
As DE-comression is often still fast for slow-but-good compression,
the obvious use case for 2nd is read-mostly data
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund
>
--
Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Consultant
Performance, Scalability and High Availability
2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ