On Fri, 5 Sep 2008, Greg Price wrote: > Hi. > > My semi-facetious remark about ZIP archives got me wondering > about what sort of compression ratios users of compressed > extended-format data sets are getting.
>From my reading, SMS uses LZW type compression. I guess that is what ZIP uses as well. > > Zipping text can get 75% to 90% compression (ie. reducing the > data to 25% to 10% of its size). How's that compare? > > Of course, no matter what the size reduction is, I'd expect it > to use a lot less CPU time than a zipping app. How much money are you willing to lose on this? In our testing on a z800 (may be better now), SMS compression was "too expensive" in terms of CPU to implement in a general case. SMS compression is likely implemented in millicode, so it will not be __significantly__ faster than an optimal HLASM implementation LZW, which I assume ZIP has. > > So, anyone care to share? > > TIA, > Greg P. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html > -- Q: What do theoretical physicists drink beer from? A: An EIN stein. Maranatha! John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
