On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Why would that be a good tradeoff to make? Larger stored values require
> more I/O, which is likely to swamp any CPU savings in the compression
> step. Not to mention that a value once written may be read many times,
> so the extra I/O cost could be multiplied many times over later on.
I agree with this analysis, but I note that the test results show it
actually improving things along both parameters.
I'm not sure how general that result is.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company