From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D72ABC29 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:01:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.188]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7TJ1uZU002145 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:01:57 +0200 Received: from [217.83.130.118] (helo=st11) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu0) with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0MKwh2-1GI8pr2dla-0003uo; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:01:19 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by st11 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DBA429E81; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:01:21 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <44F48F00.9060907@bik-gmbh.de> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:01:20 +0200 From: Florian Hars User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bardur Arantsson Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: zcat vs CamlZip References: <44F48A17.5080005@podval.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:e41b7c94d40caefc4091cd96f6bfacb8 X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 44F48F25.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; hars:01 hars:01 bik-gmbh:01 camlzip:01 ocaml:01 wrote:01 char:01 caml-list:01 florian:03 florian:03 module:03 let:03 gzip:04 gzip:04 schrieb:08 Bardur Arantsson schrieb: > Sam Steingold wrote: >> let ch = Gzip.input_char gz_in in > > This is your most likely culprit. Apart from the fact that zcat is in fact at least twice as fast as the ocaml gzip module. Yours, Florian.