On 5/28/07, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 28 May 2007 04:37:04 Nitin Gupta wrote: > On 5/28/07, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> > As you mentioned in your mail, you are using lzo1x_1_11_compress() > which is slower than what I ported (which is same as what is exported > by miniLZO). So, can you please test with the version ported - this > is found in lzo/src/lzo1x_1.c (or in minilzo.c). > Also, can you please use 'take 5' for your next testing? > > Thanks, > Nitin Will do. (that's DBITS=15, correct?)
That's D_BITS=14
However, when I averaged it 100 times, lzo1x_1_11_compress() showed better speed than your implementation - about 1.5% faster.
I don't yet have any explanation for this.
The *unsafe* decompressor, however, only shows about a 1.2% speed advantage over the safe decompressor. DRH
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
