Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 08:27:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Brandon Falk <bfalk_bsd@brandonfa.lk> Subject: Re: SMP Version of tar Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1210090826240.13459@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20121008083814.GA5830@straylight.m.ringlet.net> References: <5069C9FC.6020400@brandonfa.lk> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1210071859430.15957@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <324B736D-8961-4E44-A212-2ECF3E60F2A0@kientzle.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1210080838170.3664@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20121008083814.GA5830@straylight.m.ringlet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Not necessarily. If I understand correctly what Tim means, he's talking > about an in-memory compression of several blocks by several separate > threads, and then - after all the threads have compressed their > respective blocks - writing out the result to the output file in order. > Of course, this would incur a small penalty in that the dictionary would > not be reused between blocks, but it might still be worth it. all fine. i just wanted to point out that ungzipping normal standard gzip file cannot be multithreaded, and multithreaded-compressed gzip output would be different.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1210090826240.13459>