diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 7b57cd68..b1418da7 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -70,11 +70,11 @@ less CPU resources. To give you an idea of what DwarFS is capable of, here's a quick comparison of DwarFS and SquashFS on a set of video files with a total size of 39 GiB. The twist is that each unique video file has two sibling files with a -different set of audio streams (I didn't make this up, this is -[an actual use case](https://github.com/mhx/dwarfs/discussions/63)). So -there's redundancy in both the video and audio data, but as the streams +different set of audio streams (this is +[an actual use case](https://github.com/mhx/dwarfs/discussions/63)). +So there's redundancy in both the video and audio data, but as the streams are interleaved and identical blocks are typically very far apart, it's -quite challenging to make use of that redundancy for compression. SquashFS +challenging to make use of that redundancy for compression. SquashFS essentially fails to compress the source data at all, whereas DwarFS is able to reduce the size by almost a factor of 3, which is close to the theoretical maximum: @@ -87,10 +87,9 @@ $ ls -lh dwarfs-video-test.*fs -rw-r--r-- 1 mhx users 39G Jul 12 09:41 dwarfs-video-test.squashfs ``` -While this is already impressive, it gets even better. When mounting -the SquashFS image and performing a random-read throughput test using -[fio](https://github.com/axboe/fio/)-3.34, both `squashfuse` and -`squashfuse_ll` top out at around 230 MiB/s: +Furthermore, when mounting the SquashFS image and performing a random-read +throughput test using [fio](https://github.com/axboe/fio/)-3.34, both +`squashfuse` and `squashfuse_ll` top out at around 230 MiB/s: ``` $ fio --readonly --rw=randread --name=randread --bs=64k --direct=1 \ @@ -100,7 +99,7 @@ $ fio --readonly --rw=randread --name=randread --bs=64k --direct=1 \ READ: bw=230MiB/s (241MB/s), 230MiB/s-230MiB/s (241MB/s-241MB/s), io=13.5GiB (14.5GB), run=60004-60004msec ``` -DwarFS, however, manages to sustain **random read rates of 20 GiB/s**: +In comparison, DwarFS manages to sustain **random read rates of 20 GiB/s**: ``` READ: bw=20.2GiB/s (21.7GB/s), 20.2GiB/s-20.2GiB/s (21.7GB/s-21.7GB/s), io=1212GiB (1301GB), run=60001-60001msec