Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 11:37:49 +0530 From: Shivaram Upadhyayula <shivaram.u@quadstor.com> To: Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@clara.net>, Shivaram Upadhyayula <shivaram.u@quadstor.com>, Dennis Glatting <freebsd@penx.com>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS/compression/performance Message-ID: <CAN-_Efxv-g3=mzFg-jaq29T=PO0H4vX2NR=5kyBEOem7AxTQCg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20111101211710.GA36797@voi.aagh.net> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110122159410.26591@Elmer.dco.penx.com> <CAN-_EfxVZchM-ByjbtMO2kcjiU_=u7GF5q5_9rz7HHeL09Vn0g@mail.gmail.com> <20111101211710.GA36797@voi.aagh.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sorry i didn't know it will be stripped out :-) http://www.quadstor.com/ietbsd/compression.tgz LZF diff is against FreeBSD8-STABLE checkout about a week ago. Cheers, Shivaram On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@clara.net> wrote: > * Shivaram Upadhyayula (shivaram.u@quadstor.com) wrote: > >> I have recently started using ZFS and during that time i have tried out >> ZFS with lzf (http://oldhome.schmorp.de/marc/liblzf.html) and it seems >> to perform much better, both in speed and ratio over lzjb. >> >> Anyway my point is that, somewhere down the line other compression >> algorithms should be evaluated. gzip seems slow and it looks like lzjb >> may not be sufficient. For anyone interested, I have attached some of >> the tests i had run and the diff for lzf support. > > No you haven't :) > > -- > Thomas 'Freaky' Hurst > =A0 =A0http://hur.st/ > --=20 Reduce Storage expenditure with QUADStor Storage Virtualization http://www.quadstor.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN-_Efxv-g3=mzFg-jaq29T=PO0H4vX2NR=5kyBEOem7AxTQCg>