Re: Possible abuse of dpkg-deb -z9 for xz compressed binary packages
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 03:09:16PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 09/25/2014 02:18 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> On 09/02/2014 09:39 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >>> For -z9, it is as bad as ~670MiB to
> >>> compress, and ~65MiB to decompress.
> >>
> >> I'd say this really depends on what you do. For what I do (eg: OpenStack
> >> packages), I don't see how 65MB could be a problem. I do compress with
> >> -z9, and have no intention to change this, because it makes sense for
> >> these packages, where the bottleneck for large deployments will more be
> >> the network transfers than uncompressing on each individual nodes.
> >
> > OTOH, using -z9 on datasets smaller than the -z8 dictionary size *is* a
> > waste of memory
>
> Exactly why should I care when there's all the chances in the world that
> my users will have plenty of RAM?
Because you can't know what your users *actually* use? Let's say someone
wants to use openstack on a bunch of ARM devices or some such, and they
*don't* have two gigs of RAM?
What about the buildd machines that your packages are being built on?
670M is a lot of memory, especially if you don't need it. The "memory is
cheap nowadays" argument is a fallacy, because that'll always be true
(RAM has been getting cheaper since the 1940s, essentially; that doesn't
mean you should just waste it for no particularly good reason other than
"I'm lazy")
--
It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer
-- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26
Reply to: