Hello,
I've enabled wal_compression however I do not see any change in the 16MB size for each WAL file. Through all my googling and searching the mailing lists, I could not find a description if a change *should* be expected even though many of the articles I've read indicate compression can save disk space.
I am currently thinking that the records in the WAL file are compressed for the purpose of writing less data to disk, but that the file is still padded to 16MB. If so, does that mean to realize a space savings for archiving that my archive_command should compress the file (gzip, bz2, etc)?
Thanks,
Sean O'Grady
I've enabled wal_compression however I do not see any change in the 16MB size for each WAL file. Through all my googling and searching the mailing lists, I could not find a description if a change *should* be expected even though many of the articles I've read indicate compression can save disk space.
I am currently thinking that the records in the WAL file are compressed for the purpose of writing less data to disk, but that the file is still padded to 16MB. If so, does that mean to realize a space savings for archiving that my archive_command should compress the file (gzip, bz2, etc)?
Thanks,
Sean O'Grady
