http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8051
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 20:59, Huan Truong <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 19:19 -0500, "iosif" <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Not all compressions are created equal on all formats: >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/files/boost/1.46.1/ ... 7zip >> wins here. > > And that is exactly the point: In many cases it's not about the file > size, it's about how much you gain. > > In the past when we had to use dial-up, maybe using an insane > compression algorithm to get a 40MB file from a 180MB file file is wise, > even the decompression takes 1 hour, because you would end up spending > less time downloading+ extracting overall. Now it might be a better > choice using another program to get a 60MB file with 30 second > extraction time, the extra 20MB saved isn't really "worth it." > > Trading so much time (not free) compressing and de-compressing in cases > where bandwidth and storage are essentially free is not a good choice. > > It's hard to find where the "sweet spot" is, and it varies from cases to > cases. > > Dr. Bindner, I haven't thought of disk cache, I will try again multiple > time to make sure I got it right. The "std" for "-" is a "technical > difficulty" because the way the parameters are handled in the demo lz4 > program. I should have rewritten the whole thing. > -- > Huan Truong > 600-988-9066 > http://tnhh.net/ > >
