From: | Martín Marqués <martin(at)bugs(dot)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: beta3 |
Date: | 2001-11-20 22:51:14 |
Message-ID: | 20011120225115.DF4422AB3F@bugs.unl.edu.ar |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mar 20 Nov 2001 12:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> As an experiment, I zipped my current PG source tree with both. (This
> isn't an exact test of the distribution size, because I didn't bother
> to get rid of the CVS control files, but it's pretty close.)
>
> Original tar file: 37089280 bytes
> gzip -9: 8183182 bytes
> bzip2: 6762638 bytes
>
> or slightly less than a 20% savings for bzip over gzip. That's useful,
> but not exactly compelling. A comparison of unzip runtime also seems
> relevant:
>
> $ time gunzip pgsql.tar.gz
>
> real 0m5.48s
> user 0m4.46s
> sys 0m0.62s
>
> $ time bunzip2 pgsql.tar.bz2
>
> real 0m27.77s
> user 0m26.50s
> sys 0m0.92s
>
> If I'd downloaded this thing over a decent DSL or cable modem line,
> bzip2 would actually be a net loss in total download + uncompress time.
That would be if I have a decent DSL or cable modem. We have a dedicated line
of 756 kb, but we also have 3000 users. Maybe postgreSQL isn't that big, but
Mozilla or KDE are, and waiting for la large download isn't what I recommend
for an internet experience. :-)
> <editorial>
> The reason bzip is still an also-ran is that it's not enough better
> than gzip to have persuaded people to switch over. My bet is that
> bzip will always be an also-ran, and that gzip will remain the de
> facto standard until something comes along that's really significantly
> better, like a factor of 2 better. I've watched this sort of game
> play out before, and I know you don't take over the world with a 20%
> improvement over the existing standard. At least not without other
> compelling reasons, like speed (oops) or patent freedom (no win there
> either).
> </editorial>
I think it comes to what CPU I'm using. If I'm on an old Pentium, I may not
be happy seeing unbzip2 grabbing all my CPU, but if I'm on a last generation
PIV of, lets say 1000Mhz, I may not feel it.
Saludos... :-)
--
Porqué usar una base de datos relacional cualquiera,
si podés usar PostgreSQL?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Martín Marqués | mmarques(at)unl(dot)edu(dot)ar
Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica
Universidad Nacional
del Litoral
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fábio Santana | 2001-11-20 23:56:55 | RULES |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-11-20 22:41:03 | SPI and CommandCounterIncrement, redux |