On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 11:42:03AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Hideki Yamane wrote: > > On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 17:58:16 +0200 > > Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> wrote: > > > • xz -6 (the default) is a lot slower when compressing, fast when > > > decompressing, needs only 10MB memory, 58% size > > > • xz -9 has very slow compression, takes gobs of memory, 56% size > > > (Obviously, the "size" numbers are dragged down by uncompressible > > > files > > > when you look at the whole archive.) > > > > I tested as well, and sometimes decompression with xz is so sloooow, > > it takes 6-8 times than default gz. > > I was just watching your DebConf presentation "Lets shrink Debian > package archive" and I think there you said decompression with xz was > between 2x and 6x slower. Is that the current number? > > I'm concerned with the thought that installation of Debian (as well > as debootstrap) could take twice or more as long if xz were used for > say, every package on a Gnome desktop CD. In d-i we try to make > installation faster; slow installs make people less happy. It would > be useful to have some real-world installation time benchmarks with > and without xz.
Note that slower decompression doesn't necessarily mean longer installation time. I/O is still more time consuming than CPU. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120721175904.gb6...@glandium.org
