On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
One of the reasons that I'm a fan of SCSU is that, with even a
relatively simple encoder, it
On 26 June 2010 13:47, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
One of the reasons that I'm a
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.euwrote:
SCSU is not that useful for storage compression since fossil already
uses zlib and it has no other advantages I am aware of.
Deflate compression is only applied to commits. Deflate has
significant overhead, and is
On 26 June 2010 18:05, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
On 26 June 2010 13:47, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 21:37, Owen Shepherd owen.sheph...@e43.eu wrote:
On 25 June 2010 19:36, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
On 25 June 2010 20:18, Owen
On 26 June 2010 20:59, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote:
Indeed, the loss is at the end in case of web pages, parts which are
missing in the middle are result of inserting different streams so
SCSU would not suffer more breakage than other encodings. Still there
is no apparent benefit
5 matches
Mail list logo
