Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:58:58 -0400 (EDT) | From | Justin Piszcz <> | Subject | Re: In response to kernel compression e-mail a few months ago. |
| |
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 09:46:15PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> (Obviously we shall pick .7z) > > The hell it is. Take a look at memory footprint of those suckers... >
For compression with -mx=9 it does use 500-900 MiB of RAM, that is true. For decompression, 50-70 MiB.
Each have their pros/cons but nothing can compress the kernel any further than 7z, supports stdin/stdout and also has a native windows port. I used to strictly use bzip2 for backups and such but if I can pick off an additional 20-30% more than bzip2 for my backups which I will not use often, 7zip seems to be the winner for space savings and possibly for bandwidth/cost savings..
compress: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 10544 war 20 0 700m 681m 1632 S 141 20.7 1:41.46 7z
decompress: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 11927 war 20 0 71256 66m 1536 R 88 2.0 0:04.07 7z
Justin. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |