From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Compression speed for large files Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 09:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <81b0412b0607030503p63b4ee31v7776bd155d3dab29@mail.gmail.com> <44A91C7A.6090902@fys.uio.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Joachim Berdal Haga , Alex Riesen , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 03 18:32:40 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxRLQ-0005GU-5t for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 18:32:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750819AbWGCQcP (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:32:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751148AbWGCQcO (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:32:14 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:62162 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751124AbWGCQcM (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:32:12 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k63GVunW014092 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Jul 2006 09:31:57 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k63GVtEj024358; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 09:31:56 -0700 To: Nicolas Pitre In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.81__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.135 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Joachim Berdal Haga wrote: > > > > I can send a patch later. If it's to be a per-repo option, it's probably too > > confusing with several values. Is it ok with > > > > core.compression = [-1..9] > > > > where the numbers are the zlib/gzip constants, > > -1 = zlib default (currently 6) > > 0 = no compression > > 1..9 = various speed/size tradeoffs (9 is git default) > > I think this makes a lot of sense, although IMHO I'd simply use > Z_DEFAULT_COMPRESSION everywhere and be done with it without extra > complexity which aren't worth the size difference. I think Z_DEFAULT_COMPRESSION is fine too - we've long since started relying on pack-files and the delta compression for the _real_ size improvements, and as such, the zlib compression is less important. That said, the "core.compression" thing sounds good to me, and gives people the ability to tune things for their loads. Linus