Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 03:20:41 -0500 (EST) From: Mike Nowlin <mike@argos.org> To: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tarball releases Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011290308460.3827-100000@jason.argos.org> In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20001128160950.033784a0@mail.etinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Wouldnt putting up a compressed tarball of the releases reduce bandwidth > usage (and download time)? > > I know I've asked this before, but it seems logical enough. Hmmm......I doubt it. hawk:/usr2# ls -l 4.1.1-install.iso -rw-r--r-- 1 root backup 672761856 Sep 26 06:45 4.1.1-install.iso hawk:/usr2# gzip -v 4.1.1-install.iso 4.1.1-install.iso: 5.9% -- replaced with 4.1.1-install.iso.gz hawk:/usr2# ls -l 4.1.1-install.iso.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root backup 632871097 Sep 26 06:45 4.1.1-install.iso.gz ...the extra 40 megs you save probably isn't worth it. If you have the bandwidth to download almost 700 megs, 5% isn't going to make much difference. Plus, a lot of people don't have an extra 700 megs sitting around to store the temp file that gzip needs to decompress a file this large. (I imagine that most of the 40 megs saved is made up of text files, rawrite & friends, etc. Basically, all of the stuff that you wouldn't be downloading anyway if it was just a tarball of the required distro stuff itself.) --mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.21.0011290308460.3827-100000>