On 04/04/2014 05:26 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > On 04/04/2014 05:16 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: >> On 04/04/2014 04:15 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: >>> Compression of payload.tar >>> -------------------------- >>> >>> command | real | user | sys | memory | compr. size >>> -----------+--------+--------+------+--------+------------ >>> lbzip2 | 3.36 | 170.07 | 6.38 | 380448 | 424676188 >>> lbzip2 -u | 6.45 | 123.14 | 3.80 | 255524 | 424518771 >>> pbzip2 | 6.78 | 288.33 | 8.90 | 491644 | 425213134 >>> bzip2 | 176.68 | 175.76 | 0.67 | 8000 | 425108407 >>> >>> >>> Conclusions >>> =========== >>> [...] >>> "lbzip2 -u" always produced smallest files (even smaller than bzip2) >>> while consuming the least amount of resources (CPU power and memory). >> >> The table above says it needs about 30 times *more* memory than bzip2. > > No, it shows that it *used* that much memory. > > The system had 32 GB of RAM, lbzip2 using all 56 CPUs used less than 1.2 > % of available memory. That is *very* conservative. > > Memory usage can be limited by lowering number of threads used (-n) or > by specifying explicit memory limit (-m, undocumented for now, it will > be fully supported in future version of lbzip2 after it gets enough > testing). lbzip2 can use less memory than bzip2 while still being much faster. Example results: Command being timed: "bzip2 -kf linux-3.12.6.tar" User time (seconds): 47.70 System time (seconds): 0.20 Percent of CPU this job got: 95% Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 0:49.92 Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 7884 Command being timed: "lbzip2 -kfusn1 linux-3.12.6.tar" User time (seconds): 31.77 System time (seconds): 0.89 Percent of CPU this job got: 99% Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 0:32.96 Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 7704 -- Mikolaj Izdebski Software Engineer, Red Hat IRC: mizdebsk -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
