On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 12:58:29PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 19 September 2006 04:15, Stefan Seyfried wrote: > > > > Then Nigel is doing something clever and we do something stupid. > > Well, I don't think we do anything stupid. Of course you're free to review > the code anyway. ;-)
Ok, reworded: "Nigel is doing something clever which we do not" :-) > Nigel may be using another version of the LZF algorithm which is optimized > for speed. I didn't experiment with libLZF too much, so we're just using the > default settings. Still AFAIR it is configurable to some extent. I did experiment a bit (changed HSIZE to 13 in lzfP.h, you need to recompile liblzf IIUC), but it did not change anything. I might have been doing it wrong, though. > > it was 45% vs "unlimited", which is probably "almost 50%", but i also > > thought that the additional buffering would help. > > I'm not sure what you mean here ... The tests with the bigger images (~60000 pages) were just without any "image size" setting, so i guess the image will be almost 50% of total RAM. The smaller images (~55000 pages) were with "image size = 234045849" which is 45% of total RAM. > It _is_ reasonable to set the image size slightly below 50% of RAM, but I'm > reluctant to make it a default. Why not? We could still override it in config with "image size = -1" for "as big as it gets". -- Stefan Seyfried QA / R&D Team Mobile Devices | "Any ideas, John?" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nürnberg | "Well, surrounding them's out." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Suspend-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/suspend-devel
