Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here one of the improvements which can be done is that after prefix-suffix
> match, instead of going byte-by-byte copy as per LZ format we can directly
> copy all the remaining part of tuple but I think that would require us to use
> some different format than LZ which is also not too difficult to do, but the
> question is do we really need such a change to handle the above kind of
> worst case.


Why use LZ at all? Why not *only* prefix/suffix?