While researching, i also stumbled upon which might be worth taking a look into. My best result was 40MB in 9s with wimcapture data out.wim -compress=none -solid -solid-chunk-size=1M. With naive compression i got about 150MB archives with xz/gz/etc. Several dll files, where a lot are duplicates. That has a significant influence for large files with repetitive parts.
You can tune the compression for YOUR large tarball (in my case with many duplicate files) scenario. It has been released in 2016 while gzip is from 1992.Īdditionally: there are dramatic! difference in output size, when you want to compress a tarball from a folder structures with a lot duplicate files. Compared to zstd, it is mostly obsolete now, but almost any environment will be able to work with gzip, while support for zstd is still not there (in 2021). Maximum compatibility: If you need an algorithm that any application will be able to understand, then gzip is still the best default.
It also has some advanced features, like being able to build an external dictionary, so it can also be further optimized for specific domains. So, if you need a dependable algorithm for a broad set of use cases, zstd will most likely outperform the others. With better compression rates, it gets closer to xz but at faster speeds. When configured to run at the same speed as gzip, it will easily beat it for size. Optimizing for fast compression: When it comes to the best algorithm when optimizing primarily for compression speed, there is no clear winner in my opinion but lz4 is a good candidate.īest trade-off: If you need to pick a good overall algorithm without knowing too much about the scenario, then zstd shines. The pxz implementation allows to use multi-core, which can speed up xz compression a bit. Compression is fairly expensive though, so faster compression algorithms are better suited if that is a concern. Minimum file size: xz is still the best when it comes to minimal file sizes. bzip2 has been made mostly obsolete by xz, and zstd is likely the best for most workflows. The question is from 2014, but in the meantime there have been some trends.
#Linux snappy compression full
7z plus backup and restoring permissions and ACLs manually via getfacl and sefacl can be used which seems to be best option for both file archiving or system files backup because it will full preserve permissions and ACLs, has checksum, integrity test and encryption capability, only downside is that p7zip is not available everywhere Update: as tar only preserve normal permissions and not ACLs anyway, also plain. tar.xz by file-roller or tar with -z or -J options along with -preserve to compress natively with tar and preserve permissions (also alternatively.
#Linux snappy compression rar
I Generally use rar or 7z for archiving normal files like documents.Īnd for archiving system files I use. I did my own benchmark on 1.1GB Linux installation vmdk image: rar =260MB comp= 85s decomp= 5sĪll compression levels on max, CPU Intel I7 3740QM, Memory 32GB 1600, source and destination on RAM disk
#Linux snappy compression manual
This is the one i would use to make manual daily backups of a production environment. However, it is very long and takes a lot of memory.Īn good one where needed to minimize the impact on time AND space is gzip. If you desperatly need to spare the byte, xz at the maximum compression level (9) does the best job for text files like the kernel source. So if you really desperatly need speed, lz4 is awesome and still provides a 2.8 compression ratio. Here are a few results I extracted from this article : The compression ratio is 2.8 for lz4 and 3.7 for gzip. The fastest algorithm are by far lzop and lz4 which can produce a compression level not very far from gzip in 1.3 seconds while gzip took 8.1 second. The most size efficient formats are xz and lzma, both with the -e parameter passed. I think that this article provides very interesting results.
0 kommentar(er)
