View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Vishruth Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 25 Oct 2002 Posts: 138 Location: India
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:34 am Post subject: bzip2 vs gzip |
|
|
Bzip2 takes longer to compress and decompress. But its compression ratio is also higher when compared with gzip compression.
To me, a little more power squeased off the processor is not a problem. I run a fairly nice computer (P4, 2.4ghz, 1gb ddr ram, etc...). But downloading is a bit too slow for me. If I set out to download the 2.6-test6 linux kernel now, it will take quite a lot of time to get done with 5.5 kbps. So I'd prefer to go with bzip2 files instead of the gzip versions.
Most of the packages that portage downloads have been bzipped files. But there are certain gzipped files as well.
Why do people use gzip for larger files at all? For smaller files it shouldn't matter whether they are bzipped or gzipped (unless they need to be compressed/decompressed very frequently). Something like OpenOffice.org 1.1.0 (yep, its available on the mirrors now ) is nearly 75 megs with gzip compression. It would be so much easier to download it if it was compiled with bzip2. At least, users of gentoo would probably not mind waiting a little longer to compress and decompress, as most of us are used to apps taking a long time to compile (but most of us gentooers also have high speed connection I guess )
What is your opinion? Is gzip really better than bzip2? Is it possible to push the (de)compression times further down? _________________ http://freeshell.in/~vish/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jeedo Apprentice
Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 202 Location: Akureyri, Iceland
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bzip2 is better than gzip and gzip is better than bzip2, it's just a matter of what you're using it for.
Basically bzip2 it is best for what you mentioned, big files like openoffice.
What gzip is best for however is streaming compression, you for example couldnt make a mod_bz2 for apache to stream files from a server because the block size is bigger, the default for bzip2 is 900K though it can go as low as 100K. While gzip is 9K as i remeber.
everyone who is using gzip for large files are i think just keeping in tune with what they've always done or have yet to switch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nikai Apprentice
Joined: 02 Oct 2002 Posts: 270 Location: Kitzbühel, Austria
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess it would be fun to take advantage of the streaming properties of gzipped files by gunzipping them while they are being downloaded by portage.
When the download is finished, you'd have a tar.gz for checking the md5sum, and a tar that you only need to untar.
Should save some seconds for most tar.gz.
Which is nice, but looks rather insignificant compared to compiling times |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nephros Advocate
Joined: 07 Feb 2003 Posts: 2139 Location: Graz, Austria (Europe - no kangaroos.)
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Also, gzip is a GNU tool, released under the GPL, while bzip2 uses its own (BSD style) license.
For some, this matters. _________________ Please put [SOLVED] in your topic if you are a moron. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|