Ben Taylor wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Michael Schuster > <Michael.Schuster at sun.com> wrote: >> Ben Taylor wrote: >> >>>> 3a. using 'tar xzf pkg.tar.gz' is about 30% faster than 'gunzip >>>> pkg.tar.gz && tar xf pkg.tar'. Changing this would benefit everyone. >>> you've tested this? There's probably no harm in doing this, though >>> we have to handle this differently for bz2 version. (Though adding >>> bzip2 support to gtar if it isn't already there would not be difficult. >>> I added it to compress years ago to support bzip2 flar archives >>> since changing the lib stuff for flar installs was much too complicated) >> how about "<uncompression tool> -c pkg.tar.<suffix> | tar xf > pkg" or >> something like that? how does that compare to the other two variants? if >> favourable, one could use that and save people the effort of adapting >> gtar... > > Since I was bringing up the point of streamlining "development", > I think Pavel's point was that we save 30% by not piping for tgz files. > Obviously, the infrastructure already supports all this transparently, > and a little time is necessary to make the selective change to improve .tgz > decompresses.
I may have misread his message, but I didn't see it as piping, but as two consecutive processes, on unpacking the file *to the FS*, and the other then untaring that file. btw I think we're deviating a bit ;-) Michael -- Michael Schuster http://blogs.sun.com/recursion Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion'
