From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54285)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1gYEWu-000281-JF
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 13:19:13 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1gYELA-0001Mz-C7
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 13:07:06 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45333)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1gYEL8-0001L6-1T
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 13:07:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1gYEL7-0005xq-Rj
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 13:07:01 -0500
Subject: [bug#33600] Compressing nars with lzip or similar
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.33600.B33600.154489719822895@debbugs.gnu.org>
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
References: <20181203154335.10366-1-ludo@gnu.org> <87tvju6145.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87ftv7l6gy.fsf@gmail.com>
	<d870d06a-a95c-2b0b-a196-b5166d50400a@goebel-consult.de>
	<87pnua244k.fsf@gnu.org>
	<65fa6be4-3ddc-703b-708d-e223c2474d0b@crazy-compilers.com>
	<87tvjgeb12.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <874lbg2mh3.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
	<878t0sdthe.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87k1kbrnlq.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 19:06:21 +0100
In-Reply-To: <87k1kbrnlq.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> (Pierre Neidhardt's message of
	"Sat, 15 Dec 2018 13:17:05 +0100")
Message-ID: <87o99my89u.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
	<mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
	<mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com>, 33600@debbugs.gnu.org

Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> skribis:

> I've done some quick research over the various options.
>
> - lzip: better than gz and bzip2 for sure, possibly better than xz (at
> least according to the author).
>
> - plzip: for "parallel lzip".  With 4 threads I was able to compress
> icecat 2.5x faster.  It used 5x more memory though.  The compression
> ratio is 1-2% worse.
>
> - lrzip: it would crash whenever I would change the compression level.
>   Seems less stable.  It's as fast as plzip, while being 1-2% less
>   compressed.  I don't think it's worth using.
>
> All in all, lzip is a definite win over most options.  The main question
> is: lzip or plzip?

=E2=80=98guix publish=E2=80=99 has its own worker pool and handles parallel=
ism
internally, so in that context plain sequential lzip would be more
appropriate IMO.

Ludo=E2=80=99.