At Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:21:54 -0400, Adrian Irving-Beer wrote: > > [1 <multipart/signed (7bit)>] > [1.1 <text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)>] > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:25:07PM -0700, Andy Tai wrote: > > > Previously there were discussions of how to efficiently store binary > > files, like using xdelta or such. > > I found "rzip" the other day: > > The principal advantage of rzip is that it has an effective > history buffer of 900 Mbyte. This means it can find matching > pieces of the input file over huge distances compared to other > commonly used compression programs. The gzip program by > comparison uses a history buffer of 32 kbyte and bzip2 uses a > history buffer of 900 kbyte. > > Biggest disadvantage is that it isn't streamable; presumably, it has > to work on seekable datasets. But if one replaced zlib with rzip for > compressing the tarballs, presumably one could get similar or even > better performance to a binary delta without losing information or > changing the format.
At one point in time it was also 50-60 times slower than bzip... http://olstrans.sourceforge.net/release/OLS2000-rsync/OLS2000-rsync.html Though this article claims it is now faster than gzip: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8051 So... further testing is probably needed :p Jeremy Shaw. _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
