On 26 June 2010 20:59, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> Indeed, the loss is at the end in case of web pages, parts which are
> missing in the middle are result of inserting different streams so
> SCSU would not suffer more breakage than other encodings. Still there
> is no apparent benefit in using it.
F
On 26 June 2010 18:05, Owen Shepherd wrote:
> On 26 June 2010 13:47, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd wrote:
>>> On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek wrote:
On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd wrote:
> One of the reasons that I'm a fan of SCSU is that,
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Owen Shepherd wrote:
>
> > SCSU is not that useful for storage compression since fossil already
> > uses zlib and it has no other advantages I am aware of.
>
> Deflate compression is only applied to commits. Deflate has
> significant overhead, and is inapplicable
On 26 June 2010 13:47, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd wrote:
>> On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>>> On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd wrote:
One of the reasons that I'm a fan of SCSU is that, with even a
relatively simple encoder, it pro
On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd wrote:
> On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd wrote:
>>> One of the reasons that I'm a fan of SCSU is that, with even a
>>> relatively simple encoder, it produces output which is comparable in
>>> efficiency to
5 matches
Mail list logo
