On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 01:41:28AM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: > On Sun, 12 May 2013, Ed Schouten wrote: > > 2013/5/12 Dmitry Morozovsky <ma...@rinet.ru>: > > > I'm afraid it could produce more harm than goodness on old hardware > > > and/or other architectures like arm. > > Any change we make at FreeBSD may or may not cause problems on old > > hardware and/or other architectures like ARM. It's typically a case of > > trial and error to see what happens. > > In fact, I think that for embedded systems, using xz compression would > > even be better. Many of those systems are often more storage space > > constrained than CPU constrained (e.g. a 200 MHz wireless device with > > only 8 MB of flash). > > I think it's a pity the change has been reverted without bringing any > > hard data to the table. I've tested this change on i386/amd64 (Pentium T4400, the slowest I have), arm (Raspberry Pi) and very old mips (mips 24k). The difference in size between bzip2 and xz compressed logs around 20%. The difference in compression speed around 100%. But I believe that it is acceptable trade-of because logs rotation is an infrequent event, default log size make the absolute value of compression time negligible and xz decompresses several times faster than bzip2.
Brief test results (compression, 1 thread): cpu xz T4400 1Mb/s rpi 0.8Mb/s mips 24k 0.07Mb/s (bzip2 0.16Mb/s) > I would pretty much like more statistics about the issue as well; > unfortunately, all I have handy are x86 hardware, and most of embedded-like > systems aer amd64 atoms... > > I think some testing should be done on different platforms before making any > kind of decisions. Oh well, let's just wait another 5 years. -- Alex _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
