Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Phil Stracchino
On 02/10/10 10:36, Sean M Clark wrote: > xz/lzma is another consideration. At moderate compression levels, lzma > seems to be about the same or slightly faster than bzip2 with a little > better compression. At lower compression levels it seems like it's > about as fast as gzip while compressing n

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread John Doe
From: Sean M Clark > xz/lzma is another consideration. At moderate compression levels, lzma > seems to be about the same or slightly faster than bzip2 with a little > better compression. At lower compression levels it seems like it's > about as fast as gzip while compressing noticeably farther -

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Steve Polyack
On 2/10/2010 10:36 AM, Sean M Clark wrote: > On 2010Feb10 8:50 AM, Steve Polyack wrote: > >> On 2/10/2010 8:16 AM, Petar Bogdanovic wrote: >> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more efficient... >>> Really? >>> > [...] >

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Sean M Clark
On 2010Feb10 8:50 AM, Steve Polyack wrote: > On 2/10/2010 8:16 AM, Petar Bogdanovic wrote: >>> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more >>> efficient... >>> >> Really? [...] >> 255526 bytes less while six times slower.. >> > This is extremely dependent on the co

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Steve Polyack
On 2/10/2010 8:16 AM, Petar Bogdanovic wrote: >> I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more >> efficient... >> > Really? > > $ du -m /tmp/foo.iso > 625 /tmp/foo.iso > $ gzip -c/dev/null > 0+34388 records in > 0+34388 records out > 5

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Petar Bogdanovic
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:05:19AM -0200, Gilberto Nunes wrote: > > (...) gzip or I can use another compress program... No. > I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more > efficient... Really? $ du -m /tmp/foo.iso 625 /tmp/foo.iso $ gzip -c /dev/null

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Phil Stracchino
On 02/10/10 06:05, Gilberto Nunes wrote: > Hi folks... > > I need to know if the Compression flag on FileSet must be gzip or I can > use another compress program... > > I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more > efficient... It is true that bzip2 is more efficient than

Re: [Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Anatoly Pugachev
On 10.02.2010 / 09:05:19 -0200, Gilberto Nunes wrote: > Hi folks... > > I need to know if the Compression flag on FileSet must be gzip or I can > use another compress program... > > I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more > efficient... or even Parallel BZIP2, see htt

[Bacula-users] Bacula Compression - other then GZIP

2010-02-10 Thread Gilberto Nunes
Hi folks... I need to know if the Compression flag on FileSet must be gzip or I can use another compress program... I want use bzip2 to compress my file, because I thing bzip2 is more efficient... Thanks for any help... Regards Gilberto Nunes Ferreira TI Selbetti Gestão de Documentos Telefon