View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0002877||unreal||ircd||public||2006-04-09 18:46||2006-04-10 09:07|
|Platform||AMD K6 32bits||OS||Windows XP Professional||OS Version||SP2|
|Fixed in Version||3.2.5|
|Summary||0002877: Better compression|
|Description||I've experimented with Inno Setup to improve compression. So, I've got to reduce the packet in ~300kb using|
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|3rd party modules|
I know I can easily find this myself too, but: how much better does it compress?
Another factor to keep in mind is also the performance impact of it.
Then again, if you are running a lowspec machine (like 350MHz CPU), you probably shouldn't be running an ircd, but.. still.. ;)
Tradeoff thing :P.
||Yes, you are right. But a 25% of compression would be better. Why not? What impact could have it?|
So it's 25% better?
Ah well, guess I'll need to find out myself ;p
hm, check the help on compression levels, I paste:
lzma is the method of compression employed by the 7-Zip LZMA compressor. It typically compresses significantly better than the zip and bzip methods. However, depending on the compression level used, it can be significantly slower at compressing, and consume a lot more memory. The following table summarizes the approximate memory requirements for each of the supported lzma compression levels. If a compression level isn't specified, it defaults to max. Decompression Compression fast 3 MB 3 MB normal 4 MB 27 MB max (default) 10 MB 84 MB ultra 34 MB 369 MB <-- that's not a typo; be careful!
Additionally, see the warnings on SolidCompression etc.. and you understand what I'm talking about ;).
It's a tradeoff, but like I said, I will consider it.
Andddd the results.. :
2837K current compression levels
2433K Solid + Ultra compression
So fortunately the ulta isn't really much needed. Solid saves 400K though, which is 15%. Reading the comments regarding SolidCompression, I don't think most of the downsides concerns us..
** paste **
If yes, solid compression will be enabled. This causes all files to be compressed at once instead of separately. This can result a much greater overall compression ratio if your installation contains many files with common content, such as text files, especially if such common content files are grouped together within the [Files] section.
The disadvantage to using solid compression is that because all files are compressed into a single compressed stream, Setup can no longer randomly access the files. This can decrease performance. If a certain file isn't going to be extracted on the user's system, it has to decompress the data for that file anyway (into memory) before it can decompress the next file. And if, for example, there was an error while extracting a particular file and the user clicks Retry, it can't just seek to the beginning of that file's compressed data; since all files are stored in one stream, it has seek to the very beginning. If disk spanning was enabled, the user would have to re-insert disk 1.
Thus, it is not recommended that solid compression be enabled on huge installs (say, over 100 MB) or on disk-spanned installs. It is primarily designed to save download time on smaller installs distributed over the Internet.
** end of paste **
Added in .485:
- Made the windows installer better compress things (SolidCompression=true), suggested
by Trocotronic (0002877).
|2006-04-09 18:46||Trocotronic||New Issue|
|2006-04-10 06:44||syzop||Note Added: 0011507|
|2006-04-10 07:37||Trocotronic||Note Added: 0011509|
|2006-04-10 08:46||syzop||Note Added: 0011510|
|2006-04-10 08:57||syzop||Note Added: 0011511|
|2006-04-10 08:58||syzop||Note Added: 0011512|
|2006-04-10 09:04||syzop||Note Added: 0011513|
|2006-04-10 09:07||syzop||Status||new => resolved|
|2006-04-10 09:07||syzop||Fixed in Version||=> 3.2.5|
|2006-04-10 09:07||syzop||Resolution||open => fixed|
|2006-04-10 09:07||syzop||Assigned To||=> syzop|
|2006-04-10 09:07||syzop||Note Added: 0011514|