This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: lrzip: extreme compression (but beware its slow decompression speed)
- From: Con Kolivas <kernel at kolivas dot org>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 06:36:45 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: lrzip: extreme compression (but beware its slow decompression speed)
- References: <871uoaja4m.fsf@rho.meyering.net>
Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net> writes:
>
> In case you're evaluating what compression programs to use...
>
> This started off as a comparison of xz and lzip,
> but then I added lzrip to the mix.
> I started off by downloading the gcc-4.7.0.tar.bz2 release tarball
> and decompressing it, then recompressing using bzip2, lzip, xz and lrzip:
> (on a 6/12-core Fedora 17 x86_64 system with plenty of RAM)
>
> KiB compression
> size time m:ss file name
> ------ -------- -----------------
> 514400 NA gcc-4.7.0.tar
> 80588 0:58.12 gcc-4.7.0.tar.bz2 (-9)
> 59556 6:16.61 gcc-4.7.0.tar.lz (-9)
> 58640 5:55.78 gcc-4.7.0.tar.xz (-9e)
> 48876 2:46[*] gcc-4.7.0.tar.lrz (-z -L8 -w2000)
> $ ./lrzip -d -o - gcc-4.7.0.tar.lrz > /dev/null
> 3:36.12 (note, that's 3.5 *minutes* to decompress on a 12-core system)
Nice to see you trying out lrzip. The -z option is really for extreme
compression and not necessarily regular use (think permanent archival,
distribution over slow connections), and definitely not for one time compression
where the expectation is many people will be decompressing it and decompression
speed is crucial. The default options would be a much better choice there where
lrzip basically uses a multi-threaded lzma.
Regards,
Con