2014-09-03 17:04 GMT+09:00 Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org>: > On 02/09/14 21:17, Changwoo Ryu wrote: >> For fonts-nanum, the default is ~300 KiB 3.5% larger than -9e. And -9e >> is not better than -8e. > > I don't think anyone is arguing that higher compression settings don't > produce better compression ratios. However: > > Preset DictSize CompCPU CompMem DecMem > ... > -6 8 MiB 6 94 MiB 9 MiB <- > -7 16 MiB 6 186 MiB 17 MiB > -8 32 MiB 6 370 MiB 33 MiB <- > -9 64 MiB 6 674 MiB 65 MiB > > ... it's about cost/benefit. If we can save 300 KiB of compressed size, > but the cost is to more than triple the required memory to decompress > (from 9 MiB to 33 MiB), is that actually a worthwhile trade-off?
I think yes. The cost is 24 MiB extra memory on installation, and benefits are bandwidth and mirror size saving of big packages. > The d-i manual for wheezy on armel currently says that the bare minimum > RAM for wheezy is 31 MiB, the minimal recommended RAM is 64 MiB, and the > recommended RAM is 256 MiB or more. I'm sure those will increase > somewhat for jessie, but on a system with that sort of spec, packages > that need up to 65 MiB of RAM+swap to decompress (in addition to > whatever is needed for the kernel, and for the machine's actual > purpose!) seem rather greedy. I can't imagine any 31 MiB machine which needs to render megabytes of Truetype fonts. I think we can assume usual desktop machines for font packages. According to the d-i manual, wheezy's minimum RAM "for desktop" is 128 MiB, and 512 MiB is recommended. For jessie, the minimum is 256 MiB and 1 GiB is recommended. And these requirement/recommendation are far behind of the current computer market. In practice, I have not found any single report of OOM while installing such font packages for ~2 years. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caee2ifuw9wgo1__vl-nupq+vh1z7hfte5hemik0bqtvtj3e...@mail.gmail.com
