mirror of
https://github.com/mhx/dwarfs.git
synced 2025-08-04 10:16:34 -04:00
Update README, add zpaq
comparison
This commit is contained in:
parent
c9c40225e8
commit
4cfe2ac205
54
README.md
54
README.md
@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ A fast high compression read-only file system
|
|||||||
* [With SquashFS](#with-squashfs)
|
* [With SquashFS](#with-squashfs)
|
||||||
* [With SquashFS & xz](#with-squashfs--xz)
|
* [With SquashFS & xz](#with-squashfs--xz)
|
||||||
* [With lrzip](#with-lrzip)
|
* [With lrzip](#with-lrzip)
|
||||||
|
* [With zpaq](#with-zpaq)
|
||||||
* [With wimlib](#with-wimlib)
|
* [With wimlib](#with-wimlib)
|
||||||
* [With Cromfs](#with-cromfs)
|
* [With Cromfs](#with-cromfs)
|
||||||
* [With EROFS](#with-erofs)
|
* [With EROFS](#with-erofs)
|
||||||
@ -287,8 +288,8 @@ DwarFS image.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
## Comparison
|
## Comparison
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The SquashFS, `xz`, `lrzip` and `wimlib` tests were all done on an
|
The SquashFS, `xz`, `lrzip`, `zpaq` and `wimlib` tests were all done on
|
||||||
8 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) E-2286M CPU @ 2.40GHz with 64 GiB of RAM.
|
an 8 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) E-2286M CPU @ 2.40GHz with 64 GiB of RAM.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Cromfs and EROFS tests were done with an older version of DwarFS
|
The Cromfs and EROFS tests were done with an older version of DwarFS
|
||||||
on a 6 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU D-1528 @ 1.90GHz with 64 GiB of RAM.
|
on a 6 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU D-1528 @ 1.90GHz with 64 GiB of RAM.
|
||||||
@ -868,6 +869,8 @@ slower than `mkdwarfs` and it barely makes use of the 8 cores.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
This is a surprisingly disappointing result. The archive is 65% larger
|
This is a surprisingly disappointing result. The archive is 65% larger
|
||||||
than a DwarFS image at `-l9` that takes less than 4 minutes to build.
|
than a DwarFS image at `-l9` that takes less than 4 minutes to build.
|
||||||
|
Also, you can't just access the files in the `.lrzip` without fully
|
||||||
|
unpacking the archive first.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
That being said, it *is* better than just using `xz` on the tarball:
|
That being said, it *is* better than just using `xz` on the tarball:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -882,6 +885,53 @@ That being said, it *is* better than just using `xz` on the tarball:
|
|||||||
$ ll perl-install.tar.xz -h
|
$ ll perl-install.tar.xz -h
|
||||||
-rw-r--r-- 1 mhx users 4.3G Mar 6 22:59 perl-install.tar.xz
|
-rw-r--r-- 1 mhx users 4.3G Mar 6 22:59 perl-install.tar.xz
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### With zpaq
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
[zpaq](http://mattmahoney.net/dc/zpaq.html) is a journaling backup
|
||||||
|
utility and archiver. Again, it appears to share some of the ideas in
|
||||||
|
DwarFS, like segmentation analysis, but it also adds some features on
|
||||||
|
top that make it useful for incremental backups. However, it's also
|
||||||
|
not usable as a file system, so data needs to be extracted before it
|
||||||
|
can be used.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Anyway, how does it fare in terms of speed and compression performance?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$ time zpaq a perl-install.zpaq install -m5
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
After a few million lines of output that (I think) cannot be turned off:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
2258234 +added, 0 -removed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
0.000000 + (51161.953159 -> 8932.000297 -> 490.227707) = 490.227707 MB
|
||||||
|
2828.082 seconds (all OK)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
real 47m8.104s
|
||||||
|
user 714m44.286s
|
||||||
|
sys 3m6.751s
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
So it's an order of magnitude slower than `mkdwarfs` and uses 14 times
|
||||||
|
as much CPU resources as `mkdwarfs -l9`. The resulting archive it pretty
|
||||||
|
close in size to the default configuration DwarFS image, but it's more
|
||||||
|
than 50% bigger than the `mkdwarfs -l9`.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$ ll perl-install*.*
|
||||||
|
-rw-r--r-- 1 mhx users 490227707 Mar 7 01:38 perl-install.zpaq
|
||||||
|
-rw-r--r-- 1 mhx users 315482627 Mar 3 21:23 perl-install-l9.dwarfs
|
||||||
|
-rw-r--r-- 1 mhx users 447230618 Mar 3 20:28 perl-install.dwarfs
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
What's *really* surprising is how slow it is to extract the `zpaq`
|
||||||
|
archive again:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$ time zpaq x perl-install.zpaq
|
||||||
|
2798.097 seconds (all OK)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
real 46m38.117s
|
||||||
|
user 711m18.734s
|
||||||
|
sys 3m47.876s
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
That's 700 times slower than extracting the DwarFS image.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### With wimlib
|
### With wimlib
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
[wimlib](https://wimlib.net/) is a really interesting project that is
|
[wimlib](https://wimlib.net/) is a really interesting project that is
|
||||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user