lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-14 23:01    [W:0.106 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site