Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 04:08:47 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Olivier Nicole <olivier.nicole@cs.ait.ac.th> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Intel Core 2 DUO Message-ID: <20131030040847.24bd76e5.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <CA%2Bg%2BBvhuBN=-DZWEbmc=TsYw44ObsBTHM%2BMfcC3ff%2Bp-9-qaBQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <d515189f4d557ab0396ea4f5bb9c897c@dweimer.net> <CA%2Bg%2BBvhuBN=-DZWEbmc=TsYw44ObsBTHM%2BMfcC3ff%2Bp-9-qaBQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 10:00:27 +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote: > Compressing a 500GB dump takes a lot of > calculation. I'm not sure in how far the following theoretic speculation applies to real-world usage, but I'd like to mention it anyways. If you add compression to an archive, this compression might remove redundancy of data. For example, a minimal corruption of a compressed file could have a massive impact on the data, even up to losing the ability to uncompress it, whereas an uncompressed archive could use the built-in redundancy to handle the problem and still deliver the content properly. The _kind of data_ stored may also be considered regarding the question of compression adding any advantage (requiring less storage space). Depending on what you backup, simply omitting compression could reduce the processing load for that backup, resulting in less requirements regarding CPU and RAM (at the cost of maybe more storage space). -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131030040847.24bd76e5.freebsd>