On Dec 7, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Jakub Narebski wrote:
Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On 12/7/2007 6:23 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Is SHA a significant portion of the compute during these repacks?
I should run oprofile...
SHA1 is almost totally insignificant on x86. It hardly shows up. But
we have a good optimized version there.
zlib tends to be a lot more noticeable (especially the
*uncompression*: it may be faster than compression, but it's done
_so_
much more that it totally dominates).
Have you considered alternatives, like:
http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/ucl/
<quote>
As compared to LZO, the UCL algorithms achieve a better compression
ratio but *decompression* is a little bit slower. See below for some
rough timings.
</quote>
It is uncompression speed that is more important, because it is used
much more often.
So why didn't we consider lzo then? It's much faster than zlib.
__Luke
