Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:26:38 -0700 From: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, cvs-src@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> Subject: bsdtar vs gtar performance Message-ID: <45156E4E.6040806@kientzle.com> In-Reply-To: <20060916192437.GA15425@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200609150804.k8F84O1H056038@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060915155912.GA71796@xor.obsecurity.org> <450AD508.10608@freebsd.org> <20060915180315.GB74735@xor.obsecurity.org> <450C30ED.7090901@freebsd.org> <20060916192437.GA15425@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris and Ruslan were recently discussing the performance of bsdtar
relative to gtar, which prompted me to do some measurements
of my own. I used /usr/ports as my test, because it stresses
file and directory creation over extracting large files.
Here are some initial results, based on ten runs of each test on a
quiescent system, comparing results with PHK's "ministat":
* Creating uncompressed archives: bsdtar and gtar showed
no difference in total time.
* Extracting gzip-compressed archives: bsdtar and gtar showed
no difference in total time.
* Extracting uncompressed archives: gtar is about 13% faster
than bsdtar in my test. Interestingly (to me), this was the same
with or without -m. (I've long suspected dir timestamp restores
as a contributor; this shows otherwise.)
Tim Kientzle
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45156E4E.6040806>