Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:44:48 +0100
From:      "Martin Laabs" <martin.laabs@mailbox.tu-dresden.de>
To:        "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: emulate an end-of-media
Message-ID:  <op.t65acy13724k7f@martin>
In-Reply-To: <47C3A228.7090703@freebsd.org>
References:  <op.t63j2veq724k7f@martin> <20080225154455.4822e72a@bhuda.mired.org> <47C33384.6040701@dial.pipex.com> <200802252243.m1PMhTeq016201@fire.js.berklix.net> <47C3A228.7090703@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

> Yes, gzip or bzip2 compress better, but they also:
>   * Are a lot slower.

Yesterday I made a comparison regarding the speed
of compress, bzip2 and gzip.
And actually compress is much slower than gzip:


$ dd if=3D/dev/random |compress -c > /dev/null
3883204 bytes/sec
$ dd if=3D/dev/random |gzip -c > /dev/null
8357889 bytes/sec
$ dd if=3D/dev/random |bzip2 -c > /dev/null
1042735 bytes/sec

I also made a comparison between gzip and bzip2 regarding
the compression ratio on a dump of my home directory (3.2GB)
bzip2 took about 74min to compress, gzip only 11minutes. And
in terms of compression ratio bzip2 was only 3% better than
gzip.

Best greet,
   Martin L.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.t65acy13724k7f>