Re: Decompression speed: zip vs lzo
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Jan 9, 2008, 23:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LSU.1.00.0801092328580.31053@racer.site>
- In-Reply-To
- <47855765.9090001@vilain.net>
Hi,
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Sam Vilain wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> I think to go forward this would need a prototype and benchmark figures > for things like "annotate" and "fsck --full" - but bear in mind it would > be a long road to follow-up to completion, as repository compatibility > would need to be a primary concern and this essentially would create a > new pack type AND a new *object* type.
No new object type. Why should it? But it has to have a config variable which says what type of packs/loose objects it has (and you will not be able to mix them).
> Not really worth it IMHO - gzip is already fast enough on even the most > modern processor these days.
I agree that gzip is already fast enough.
However, pack v4 had more goodies than just being faster; it also promised to have smaller packs. And pack v4 would need to have the same infrastructure of repacking if the client does not understand v4 packs.
Ciao, Dscho