Is it worth it making a ZFS partition with compression for Postgres in order to save space? I assume since it's mostly text it should compress fairly well.
Or is there a better FS for compression?
@matrix@gameliberty.club Don't do FS compression at all for a Postgresql server. You'll mess up your performance.
@solarsailor
I have 3 3900X threads. I don't think it should handle it ok.
@solarsailor
I thought it should be usef to some latency since the initial release was all the way back when SSDs weren't a thing (I think)
@matrix@gameliberty.club Half the reason for adoption of SSDs was to make MySQL and PostgreSQL run faster.
@sjw @solarsailor lz4 is probably still the fastest though
https://indico.fnal.gov/event/16264/contributions/36466/attachments/22610/28037/Zstd__LZ4.pdf
@matrix@gameliberty.club It's not about CPU usage, it's about write latency. PostgreSQL and other in memory DBs really really really want to have writes that commit to disk quickly, because they are essentially single threaded while writes are in progress. FS compression increases write latency to the degree that its compression is effective - a little bit for LZO, a lot for GZip. The whole reason Intel created NVDIMMs was to reduce database I/O latency, for example.