The Monday 22 December 2008 17:26:17 Eugene V. Lyubimkin, you wrote : > Nelson Castillo wrote: > >> No, don't. I'm just wondering why. Actually I did a test in the same > >> order (bzip2 and the pbzip2) on a tar of my picture directory and on a > >> video. I just don't understand why my 2 runs aren't much quicker with > >> pbzip2. > > > > Your test data is already compressed :-) You will not be able to > > compress it much more. > > But is this really reason to take twice CPU time with no significant reduce > of time? Though maybe it's just peculiarity of pbzip2 implementation. That's my concern indeed. I don't understand why using twice more calculations the time is the same or bigger. I've just tested a comparison on kernel directory and it gives : 17:24 robotux@simplet ~% time bzip2 kernel.tar bzip2 kernel.tar 152,65s user 1,56s system 94% cpu 2:42,67 total 17:27 robotux@simplet ~% time pbzip2 kernel2.tar pbzip2 kernel2.tar 142,18s user 1,78s system 181% cpu 1:19,17 total I think pbzip2 in unstable doesn't like my core 2 duo Regards, Thomas Preud'homme -- Why debian : http://www.debian.org/intro/why_debian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.