> > No, what I meant was that I argued to use a bigger max-obj-size because I > could not see deduplication happening with storing of movies and because > the download granularity argument was not the case. You replied why not. > The output of s3qlstat was my response. > >> >> I think the only reason for bigger max-obj-size is a db size. But 62.8 MiB is considerably small. I have a setup with 10Gb+ of sqlite DB and it works, I guess the cons of bigger max-obj-size is multicore processing. If block is big, then s3ql should wait till next big block will be copied to start using next core. Or not?
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "s3ql" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
