From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54)
	id 1FaxBd-0001xr-Oz
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 02 May 2006 15:53:18 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k42FqQfj014144;
	Tue, 2 May 2006 15:52:26 GMT
Received: from watcher.kimaker.com (c-67-169-29-182.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.169.29.182])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k42FobMo017669
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 2 May 2006 15:50:38 GMT
Received: by watcher.kimaker.com (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id D2F9875851F; Tue,  2 May 2006 08:50:36 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 08:50:36 -0700
From: Ryan Phillips <rphillips@gentoo.org>
To: Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org>
Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Having fun with compression
Message-ID: <20060502155036.GA43906@watcher.kimaker.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Ryan Phillips <rphillips@gentoo.org>,
	Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org>, gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
References: <1146414623.8541.10.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1146414623.8541.10.camel@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-Archives-Salt: 438edd38-366d-4f14-b6fd-55013f3590aa
X-Archives-Hash: b96a95208640de6d2f8ad1c465ef139b


--zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org> said:
> Hi all,
>=20
> I had this random idea that many of our distfiles are .tar.gz while more
> efficient compression methods exist. So I did some testing for fun:
>=20
> We have ~15k .tar.gz in distfiles. ~6500 .tar.bz2, ~2000 others.
> A short run over 477 distfiles spanning 833M gave me 586M of .tar.bz2 -
> roughly 30% more efficient!
> A comparison run with 7zip gave me 590M files, so bzip2 seems to be
> quite good.
>=20
> I don't think repackaging every .tar.gz as .tar.bz2 is a reasonable
> option (breaks MD5 digests, we lose the fallback download from the
> homepage), but maybe this motivates people to save bandwidth and migrate
> their packaging to bzip2.

Patrick,=20

did you benchmark CPU load?  Often bzip2 takes 3x as long to
uncompress a package than bzip.  Often, the space savings doesn't
justify the cost of how long it takes for the cpu to decompress the
archive.

-ryan

--zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEV3/M6cLeDQrpxL8RAo3SAJ93z+wPrtifKPeewuEQAwojRcnbPwCdGLoY
+xTWX1amAeM7Fa8y1Y/mA7Q=
=SWfd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx--
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list