Re: WAL compression setting after PostgreSQL LZ4 default change
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>, Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
Date: 2026-07-07T22:26:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 03, 2026 at 04:38:06PM +0800, Japin Li wrote: > On Fri, 03 Jul 2026 at 11:58, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2026 at 8:45 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 06:25:09PM +0800, wenhui qiu wrote: >>> > The recent PostgreSQL commit changes the default TOAST compression to lz4 >>> > when LZ4 support is available, based on the rationale that LZ4 is generally >>> > more efficient than pglz in terms of CPU usage and compression >>> > ratio. Given that, should we also consider changing the default >>> > compression method used by wal_compression = on from pglz to lz4? >>> >>> "on" is just a backward-compatible value, so we could let it as-is. >> >> Yes, so +1 to leaving "on" as it is. Making its meaning depend on >> the build options seems very confusing. Users who want lz4 or zstd >> can simply specify those methods explicitly instead of using "on". > > Understood. I'll withdraw this from the CommitFest. I disagree. The whole argument is that most users don't bother changing the defaults. Here, a change between lz4/zstd and pglz is like day and night; folks are going to see improvements all the time if we switch to a better default when we can, in terms of CPU, memory and IO. -- Michael