alternative compression algorithms?
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | alternative compression algorithms? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55341569.1090107@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: alternative compression algorithms?
Re: alternative compression algorithms? Re: alternative compression algorithms? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi there, in the past we've repeatedly discussed the option of using a different compression algorithm (e.g. lz4), but every time the discussion died off because of fear of possible patent issues [1] [2] and many other threads. Have we decided it's not worth the risks, making patches in this area futile? The reason why I'm asking about this is the multivariate statistics patch - while optimizing the planning overhead, I realized that considerable amount of time is spent decompressing the statistics (serialized as bytea), and using an algorithm with better decompression performance (lz4 comes to mind) would help a lot. The statistics may be a few tens/hundreds kB, and in the planner every millisecond counts. Would a differentiated approach work? That is, either adding an initdb option allowing the user to choose an alternative compression algorithm (and thus let him consider the possible patent issues), or using different algorithms for different pieces of data (e.g. keep pglz for the user data, and lz4 for statistics). The first option is quite trivial to implement - I already have an experimental patch implementing that (attached, but a bit dirty). The second option is probably more difficult (we'd have to teach tuple toaster about multiple compression algorithms and pass that information somehow). Also, I'm not sure it'd make the patent concerns go away ... I'm a bit confused though, because I've noticed various other FOSS projects adopting lz4 over the past few years and I'm yet to find a project voicing the same concerns about patents. So either they're reckless or we're excessively paranoid. Also, lz4 is not the only compression algorithm available - I've done a bunch of tests with lz4, lz4hc, lzo and snappy, and lzo actually performed better than lz4 (not claiming that's a universal truth). But I suppose that the patent concerns are not somehow specific to lz4 but about the compression in general. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/50EA7976.5060809@lab.ntt.co.jp [2] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130614230142.GC19641@awork2.anarazel.de -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: