Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 12:39:12 +1000 From: Norberto Meijome <freebsd@meijome.net> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: James Long <list@museum.rain.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: speed of bzip2 versus gzip Message-ID: <20070721123912.7f2bb65b@localhost> In-Reply-To: <2BF10D44-4FB5-4F07-B515-553BC705B900@mac.com> References: <20070720220337.GA87174@ns.umpquanet.com> <20070721103710.1e16a319@localhost> <2BF10D44-4FB5-4F07-B515-553BC705B900@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:50:20 -0700
Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> wrote:
> Of course, it all depends on what your priorities are, too-- if what
> you want is a final tarball which is being mirrored and downloaded
> frequently, then your goal is to obtain the absolute best
> compression, and how much CPU --best takes isn't important.
of course ... in my case i had to sacrifice the space in order to finish
the job in less than 24 hours :)
The better compression on bzip2 part isn't linear (in my tests) with the amount
of time it takes to achieve it. I bet there are some knobs to modify amount of
buckets or other memory related settings in bzip2 to make work faster...
if not, maybe another algorithm...but [bg]zip are so widespread they may become
the one choice if you have to distribute the files to a wider audience.
_________________________
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Albert Einstein
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
Warned.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070721123912.7f2bb65b>