On Jul 20, 2007, at 5:37 PM, Norberto Meijome wrote:
Is it normal for bzip2 to be significantly slower than gzip?
If not, where can I look for things that might be causing
"bzip2 --fast" to take 50-60 times longer to compress a
(sendmail log) file than gzip?


i never measured it to see if it is 50-60 times slower, but yes, gzip blows bzip2 out of the water on speed. I wanted to use bzip2 to compress multi-GB weblog files, but gzip beat it my miles, and bzip2 wasn't THAT much better @
compressing it to make it worth it.

Thanks for the feedback, Norberto.

Of course, it all depends on what your priorities are, too-- if what you want is a final tarball which is being mirrored and downloaded frequently, then your goal is to obtain the absolute best compression, and how much CPU --best takes isn't important.

Comparing the default (-5 compression?) of gzip to bzip2 would probably be more reasonable if you care about reasonably timely compression.

--
-Chuck

_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to