Re: In response to kernel compression e-mail a few months ago.

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Al Viro <viro@...>
Cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <apiszcz@...>
Date: Sunday, October 14, 2007 - 4:58 pm

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007, Al Viro wrote:


For compression with -mx=9 it does use 500-900 MiB of RAM, that is true.
For decompression, 50-70 MiB.

Each have their pros/cons but nothing can compress the kernel any further 
than 7z, supports stdin/stdout and also has a native windows port.  I used 
to strictly use bzip2 for backups and such but if I can pick off an 
additional 20-30% more than bzip2 for my backups which I will not use often,
7zip seems to be the winner for space savings and possibly for 
bandwidth/cost savings..

compress:
   PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
10544 war       20   0  700m 681m 1632 S  141 20.7   1:41.46 7z

decompress:
   PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
11927 war       20   0 71256  66m 1536 R   88  2.0   0:04.07 7z

Justin.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: In response to kernel compression e-mail a few months ago., Justin Piszcz, (Sun Oct 14, 4:58 pm)