Hideki Yamane wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 17:58:16 +0200 > Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> wrote: > > • xz -6 (the default) is a lot slower when compressing, fast when > > decompressing, needs only 10MB memory, 58% size > > • xz -9 has very slow compression, takes gobs of memory, 56% size > > (Obviously, the "size" numbers are dragged down by uncompressible files > > when you look at the whole archive.) > > I tested as well, and sometimes decompression with xz is so sloooow, > it takes 6-8 times than default gz. I was just watching your DebConf presentation "Lets shrink Debian package archive" and I think there you said decompression with xz was between 2x and 6x slower. Is that the current number? I'm concerned with the thought that installation of Debian (as well as debootstrap) could take twice or more as long if xz were used for say, every package on a Gnome desktop CD. In d-i we try to make installation faster; slow installs make people less happy. It would be useful to have some real-world installation time benchmarks with and without xz. BTW, when we switched to building udebx with xz, Philipp Kern benchmarked it using little or no additional CPU to decompress xz produced with -Zxz -z1 -Sextreme http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2011/10/msg00247.html -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature