On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:26 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Looks like a lot of the difference being seen and the comments made > about one being faster than the other are because one system is > compressing *everything*, while PG (quite intentionally...) only > compresses the data sometimes- once it hits the TOAST limit. That > likely also contributes to why you're seeing the on-disk size > differences that you are. Hm. It may be intentional, but is it ideal? Employing datum compression in the 1kb-8kb range with a faster but less compressing algorithm could give benefits. merlin
