Horton

Re: wal_compression=zstd

Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-03-11T04:28:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:23:59PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 07:14:11AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Anyway there's no compelling reason to not use the default.  If we were to use
> > a non-default default, we'd have to choose between 1 and 2 (or some negative
> > compression level).  My thinking was that zstd-1 would give the lowest-hanging
> > fruits for zstd, while minimizing performance tradeoff, since WAL affects
> > interactivity.  But choosing between 1 and 2 seems like bikeshedding.
> 
> Yeah, I have looked again at the patch today, and I saw no reason to
> not apply it to give more options to the user as zstd or lz4 are both
> good in their own ways.  So done, with the default level used.

It's great news - thanks.

-- 
Justin

Commits

  1. Bump XLOG_PAGE_MAGIC due to the addition of wal_compression=zstd

  2. Add support for zstd with compression of full-page writes in WAL