Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 12:07:33 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, kientzle@freebsd.org, dougb@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "tar -c|gzip" faster than "tar -cz"?!? Message-ID: <20061013170733.GA2226@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <452FC31C.2030505@kientzle.com> References: <200610131345.k9DDjYkD030561@lurza.secnetix.de> <452FC31C.2030505@kientzle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Oct 13), Tim Kientzle said: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > >Meanwhile I had a quick look at the code: gzip uses some optimized > >assembler code ... Maybe that's the reason why gzip is noticeably > >faster. > > Anyone care to try this test on PPC, ARM, or Sparc? The only assembly in our match.S is for x86 and 68k. Newer gzips also include an ia64 version. > There's a move afoot to replace the GPL gzip with a more > openly-licensed gzip implemented on top of libz. I wonder if the > libz implementors have similar assembly optimizations that we should > be using? Odd. I actually disabled the assembly file in my tree because gcc generated 20%-faster code from deflate.c than the provided assembly code in match.S , at least on a pIII. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061013170733.GA2226>