>Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >> >Optimizing bunzip is not worth the time/effort IMHO. Because it's a >> >CPU resource hog and only provides a couple of percentage points >> >reduction in the compressed file size compared to gzip. By far a >> >better solution is to ship .gz install files. >> >> +1 I've measured it and it's somewhere between 5-8%. >[snip] > >Are you talking about 5-8% performance improvement by bumping the >compiler optimizer to a higher level ? If "yes" - would you sponsor a >small patch for this ?
No, I've measured the difference between gzip and bzip2 compressed "wos" archives. (Just checked again and it seems to be 7.5 percent so my memory was correct) To bzcat vs zcat all files costs the following amount of time: (zcat is limited in I/O and was run concurrently with bzcat on a 2 CPU 2.2MHz Opteron system) time zcat .... > /dev/null 77.91u 3.97s 1:58.24 69.2% time bzcat ... > /dev/null 723.85u 7.13s 12:59.07 93.8% We're talking nearly a factor 10 of CPU time on a relatively fast system. Casper
