I made a mistake in my numbers, reading seconds as minutes, and have added
AMATERSE just to round off the mix. Just shouldn't respond when the fridge
is calling.
ICEGENER copy NO Compression 108 trks 0.09 secs
SMS Compression 76 Trks, 0.32 secs
ISPZIP Compression 8 trks 1.18 secs
AMATERSE
G'day Greg,
Thought I would take the opportunity to run a quick test on a z800. Copying
a 108 track SMF dataset.
1. Using ICEGENER without compression 9 CPU seconds into 108 tracks.
2. Using ICEGENER with compression 30 CPU seconds into 76 tracks.
3. Using ISPZIP compression 78 CPU seconds into
Paul Gillis wrote:
G'day Greg,
Thought I would take the opportunity to run a quick test on a z800. Copying
a 108 track SMF dataset.
1. Using ICEGENER without compression 9 CPU seconds into 108 tracks.
2. Using ICEGENER with compression 30 CPU seconds into 76 tracks.
3. Using ISPZIP
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.
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
,
Paul Gillis
Subject: Compression figures, anyone?
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.
Zipping text can get 75% to 90% compression (ie. reducing the
data to 25% to 10% of its
I just completed an exercise using PKZIP on the mainframe for SMF data
several 24-hour periods for SMF types 30 (subtypes 4 and 5 only), 70, 72,
and some others. The compression percentage achieved was upwards of 90%,
taking what was a 4GB data file down to about 250MB. This pre-processing
eased
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.
Paul Gillis wrote:
Greg,
I used to get about 80% when zipping SMF data, haven't done that for a while
and never considered the CPU cost as I had to get the data under 2Gb. The
reasons are now obsolete. The zip engine I used on MVS was ISPZIP from ASE.
I may still have the performance
8 matches
Mail list logo
