From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-33798-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1LDjEI-0006sS-TP
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:33:39 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 52504E044F;
	Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:33:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BFF1E044F
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:33:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.33] (unknown [77.246.104.171])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F726529C
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:33:35 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New global USE flag: gzip-dict
From: Peter Volkov <pva@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <20081219170623.150bc0ec@snowcone>
References: <1229455276.2454.23.camel@localhost>
	 <20081216192712.516a1d80@snowmobile> <1229457985.2454.30.camel@localhost>
	 <20081218003449.GA7573@comet> <1229697641.13304.1258.camel@localhost>
	 <20081219144552.750e544b@snowcone> <1229705762.13304.1321.camel@localhost>
	 <20081219170623.150bc0ec@snowcone>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:32:44 +0300
Message-Id: <1229707964.13304.1334.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.2 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: e90560b5-4191-44d2-ab48-a4fb2ab70a83
X-Archives-Hash: 985f4c243455d9128c3074520adfdf8f

=D0=92 =D0=9F=D1=82=D0=BD, 19/12/2008 =D0=B2 17:06 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh=
 =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> But disk space is cheap. How big are the dictionaries? The vim
> dictionaries are around half a meg uncompressed, and if you're looking
> to save a meg or two in disk space on the kind of system that includes
> dictionaries then you're doing something seriously wrong...

Size is times larger. All dictionary data (without index) I have
currently installed occupies 93M in compressed form and uncompressed
it'll take 402M. This does not count dictionaries I'm going to add into
the tree. If I remember correctly all dictionaries I needed from
stardict site took about 1Gbyte (uncompressed). Also some people use
more then two languages and then they'll use more dictionaries.

> Really, all that compression seems to do is save a small amount of
> irrelevant disk space, at the cost of requiring more disk space and
> memory for a new library and slowing things down to a level that's
> unacceptable on some systems. Compression makes sense for network
> transfers, backups and file formats that do their own domain specific
> compression. Elsewhere? Likely not so much.

I agree in general but in this specific case compression does a good
job.

--=20
Peter.