lzip-bug
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: plzip: manual gives very false numbers, real defaults are huge!


From: Steffen Nurpmeso
Subject: Re: plzip: manual gives very false numbers, real defaults are huge!
Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 00:06:46 +0200
User-agent: s-nail v14.9.24-621-g0d1e55f367

Hello again Antonio.

Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote in
 <663B9C7A.9010401@gnu.org>:
 |Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
 |>    #?0|kent:plzip-1.11$ cp /x/balls/gcc-13.2.0.tar.xz X1
 |>    #?0|kent:plzip-1.11$ cp X1 X2
 |> [...]
 |>    -rw-r----- 1 steffen steffen 89049959 May  7 22:14 X1.lz
 |>    -rw-r----- 1 steffen steffen 89079463 May  7 22:14 X2.lz
 |
 |Note that if you use uncompressible files as input, you'll always obtain 
 |similar compressed sizes, no matter the compression level or the diction\
 |ary 
 |size. Try the test with gcc-13.2.0.tar and you'll see the difference. \
 |(As in 
 |your other test with /x/doc/coding/austin-group/202x_d4.txt).
 |
 |> I think dynamically scalling according to the processors, talking
 |> into account the dictionary size, as you said above, is the sane
 |> approach for "saturating" with plzip, in the above job there are
 |> quite a lot of files, of varying size (the spam DB being very
 |> large), and one recipe is not good for them all.
 |
 |Maybe there is a better way (almost optimal for many files) to compress \
 |the 
 |spam DB that does not require a parallel compressor, but uses all the 

That was only an example, that is a single bogofilter lmdb text
dump, perfect for your default algorithm.

 |processors in your machine. (And, as a bonus, achieves maximum compression 
 |on files of any size and produces reproducible files).
 |
 |   ls | xargs -n1 -P4 lzip -9
 |
 |The command above should produce better results than a saturated plzip.
 |
 |'ls' may be replaced by any way to generate a list of the files to be 
 |compressed. See 
 |http://www.gnu.org/software/findutils/manual/html_node/find_html/xargs-o\
 |ptions.html

Yes, thank you.. but no, then i would simply ()&, save away the
$!'s and wait(1) for them, in this case.  I find the adaption
compression of (p)lzip still very satisfying (all this started up
with gzip quite long ago, i think (arj back in the 90s on 4DOS
/ Windows 95B, in fact)).

 |Hope this helps,
 |Antonio.

Oh, i very much like your plzip!  Thank you very much.  lzlib too
but for the malloc()s 8-)

 --End of <663B9C7A.9010401@gnu.org>

I wish you a good time, dear Antonio.

Ciao from Germany,

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]