Re: emulate an end-of-media
- From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:37:52 -0800
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 09:28:53PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 07:44:48PM +0100, Martin Laabs wrote:
I also made a comparison between gzip and bzip2 regarding
the compression ratio on a dump of my home directory (3.2GB)
bzip2 took about 74min to compress, gzip only 11minutes. And
in terms of compression ratio bzip2 was only 3% better than
gzip.
That's not a realistic test case. bzip2 normally takes trice the time
and compresses 10% better. I can't comment on compress.
Actually I've found that it depends on which architecture you run bzip2
and gzip on. Taking a sample set of files, I found bzip2 was faster on
amd64 than gzip; and gzip was faster on i386 than bzip2.
[its been a while... I might have the two reversed]
--
-- David (obrien@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon?
Let's not play "Jeopardy-style quoting"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Prev by Date: Re: Call for testers: CVSMode for csup
- Next by Date: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/nfsclient nfs_socket.c
- Previous by thread: Re: sched_ule: roundrobin_callout replacement ?
- Next by thread: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/nfsclient nfs_socket.c
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
