Re: nnml compression: state of the art?

[Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org>]

Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@peorth.gweep.net> writes:

> * merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz)  on Thu, 29 Mar 2001

> |       system '/bin/gzip', "-9v", $File::Find::name;
> 
> For the most part all that -9 will gain you over -1 is everything runs
> slower.

I disagree.  I tried it on a mail folder I have around:

20299155        Unzipped
 5719754        Gzipped -1
 4761790        Gzipped -9
 4795281        Gzipped (default)

Not much win in size over the default, but definately better than -1.

In terms of time:

time gzip [14:45:05] wesley:~/Library/MailArchive $ time gzip \#linux.kernel.2001-02.gz#

real	0m7.041s
user	0m4.870s
sys	0m0.150s
[14:45:14] wesley:~/Library/MailArchive $ !gun
gunzip \#linux.kernel.2001-02.gz#.gz
[14:45:21] wesley:~/Library/MailArchive $ time gzip -9 \#linux.kernel.2001-02.gz#

real	0m7.732s
user	0m5.530s
sys	0m0.160s
[14:45:34] wesley:~/Library/MailArchive $ gunzip \#linux.kernel.2001-02.gz#.gz
[14:46:26] wesley:~/Library/MailArchive $ time gzip -1 \#linux.kernel.2001-02.gz#

real	0m5.661s
user	0m2.830s
sys	0m0.220s


So, in general, I just leave things alone unless I want things to run
faster.

-- 
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - In a variety of flavors!
A CONS is an object which cares.  -- Bernie Greenberg