On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 02:39:13PM -0800, roland wrote: > > # zfs get compressratio > > NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE > > pool/gzip compressratio 3.27x - > > pool/lzjb compressratio 1.89x - > > this looks MUCH better than i would have ever expected for smaller files. > > any real-world data how good or bad compressratio goes with lots of very > small but good compressible files , for example some (evil for those solaris > evangelists) untarred linux-source tree ? > > i'm rather excited how effective gzip will compress here. > > for comparison: > > sun1:/comptest # bzcat /tmp/linux-2.6.19.2.tar.bz2 |tar xvf - > --snipp-- > > sun1:/comptest # du -s -k * > 143895 linux-2.6.19.2 > 1 pax_global_header > > sun1:/comptest # du -s -k --apparent-size * > 224282 linux-2.6.19.2 > 1 pax_global_header > > sun1:/comptest # zfs get compressratio comptest > NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE > comptest tank compressratio 1.79x -
Don't start sending me your favorite files to compress (it really should work about the same as gzip), but here's the result for the above (I found a tar file that's about 235M uncompressed): # du -ks linux-2.6.19.2/ 80087 linux-2.6.19.2 # zfs get compressratio pool/gzip NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool/gzip compressratio 3.40x - Doing a gzip with the default compression level (6 -- the same setting I'm using in ZFS) yields a file that's about 52M. The small files are hurting a bit here, but it's still pretty good -- and considerably better than LZJB. Adam -- Adam Leventhal, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/ahl _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
