☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 year agoNew File Formatlemmy.mlimagemessage-square87fedilinkarrow-up1703arrow-down116
arrow-up1687arrow-down1imageNew File Formatlemmy.ml☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square87fedilink
minus-squareGamma@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·edit-21 year agoThought I’d check on the Linux source tree tar. zstd -19 vs lzma -9: ❯ ls -lh total 1,6G -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 1,4G Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 128M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 138M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.zst About +8% compared to lzma. Decompression time though: zstd -d -k -T0 *.zst 0,68s user 0,46s system 162% cpu 0,700 total lzma -d -k -T0 *.lzma 4,75s user 0,51s system 99% cpu 5,274 total Yeah, I’m going with zstd all the way.
minus-squarethe_weez@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up6·1 year agoNice data. Thanks for reminding me why I prefer zstd
minus-squareAVincentInSpace@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agodamn I did not know zstd was that good. Never thought I’d hear myself say this unironically but thanks Facebook
minus-squareGamma@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 year ago*Thank you engineers who happen to be working at Facebook
Thought I’d check on the Linux source tree tar.
zstd -19vslzma -9:❯ ls -lh total 1,6G -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 1,4G Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 128M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.lzma -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 138M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.zstAbout +8% compared to lzma. Decompression time though:
zstd -d -k -T0 *.zst 0,68s user 0,46s system 162% cpu 0,700 total lzma -d -k -T0 *.lzma 4,75s user 0,51s system 99% cpu 5,274 totalYeah, I’m going with zstd all the way.
Nice data. Thanks for reminding me why I prefer zstd
damn I did not know zstd was that good. Never thought I’d hear myself say this unironically but thanks Facebook
*Thank you engineers who happen to be working at Facebook
Very true, good point