Dear David,
On Nov 19, 9:02 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think bz2 is the smaller than tar.gz in general.
> You might try doing a few examples to see how they
> compare in the type of data you are compressing,
> to see if it makes a difference. I think decompressing tar.gz files
> might be slightly faster in some examples than tar.bz2 files,
> so it also depends whether speed is an issue.
Since Python's tarfile provides both gzip and bzip2 compression (is
this different from bz2?), I allow the user to choose. I guess this is
the best solution.
A little test (but just one test, so, it might be different in
general):
The times include extracting the archive plus reconstructing my
cohomology ring.
uncompressed:
size: 113152000
time: 9.49 s
gzip:
size: 65874620
time: 14.00 s
bzip2:
size: 63927806
time: 34.18 s
bzip2 is a little smaller, but much slower. So, I let the user choose,
but the default is gzip.
Yours,
Simon
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
