Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:07:16 +0100 | From | Jean Delvare <> | Subject | Re: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion |
| |
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 00:28:39 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: > Jean Delvare wrote: > > So the gz option is unsurprisingly faster, setting up the source tree > > takes almost 3 minutes less (-21%). > > If the download link had been slower than about 75 kB/s, the bz2 option > would have been faster even on this old machine. > > With xz, download would be faster than bz2 and decompression would be > somewhere between bz2 and gz --- at least on machines without notable > memory constraints. xz's decompressor is more memory hungry than > bzip2's one as far as I understand their manual pages. But at the > default xz compressor setting of -6, the decompressor will still use > just 10 MB and should therefore not cause even your 64 MB machine to > swap all the time during decompression.
Note that, if memory consumption is really a concern on either end, we could use xz -5, which still achieves much better compression than bz2 but doesn't require more memory for decompression.
-- Jean Delvare
| |