On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <
hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
>
> All in all, this is a bit clumsy and very time-consuming to pull off in practice, but it's possible at least if the conditions are just right.
>
> What should we do about this? Make it configurable on a per-table basis?
I think making it configurable on a per-table basis have another advantage
of controlling impact of FPW compression for tables that have less
compressible data (there is a CPU overhead of compression even though
it doesn't actually compress much). In-fact I had added such an option
during development of another related patch (WAL compression for Update),
if we think it is useful, I can extract that part of the patch and rebase it.