Re: alternative compression algorithms?
От | Petr Jelinek |
---|---|
Тема | Re: alternative compression algorithms? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55416DA0.7050008@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: alternative compression algorithms? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 30/04/15 00:44, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Tomas Vondra >> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Sure, it's not an ultimate solution, but it might help a bit. I do have >>> other ideas how to optimize this, but in the planner every milisecond >>> counts. Looking at 'perf top' and seeing pglz_decompress() in top 3. > >> I suggested years ago that we should not compress data in >> pg_statistic. Tom shot that down, but I don't understand why. It >> seems to me that when we know data is extremely frequently accessed, >> storing it uncompressed makes sense. > > I've not been following this thread, but I do not think your argument here > holds any water. pg_statistic entries are generally fetched via the > syscaches, and we fixed things years ago so that toasted tuple entries > are detoasted before insertion in syscache. So I don't believe that > preventing on-disk compression would make for any significant improvement, > at least not after the first reference within a session. AFAICS the syscache tuples are detoasted but not decompressed before insertion to syscache (catcache calls toast_flatten_tuple which doesn't do decompression) so the pglz_decompress is still called every time. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: