Re: uswsusp history lesson [was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: swsusp / suspend2 reliability]

Nigel Cunningham
2006-07-12T10:16:33Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 526 bytes --]

Hi.

On Wednesday 12 July 2006 20:09, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> We're doing something like you are, but I think we're using some other
> option in LZF, because the resulting image size is 30-40% of the
> uncompressed one. That's better for encryption later on, but obviously not
> for speed.

Maybe it's just that the caches compress better? 50% is common, but lower
values are sometimes seen.

Regards,

Nigel
--
Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham
5 Mitchell Street
Cobden 3266
Victoria, Australia

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]