Instant Own
August 04, 2021, 12:29:42
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: ioclan.tk domain remains.
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Gallery Staff List Members Login Register  

Planned downtime...

Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Planned downtime...  (Read 395 times)
RMF
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 36
Offline Offline

Posts: 2246


Rest in pieces!


View Profile WWW
« on: September 11, 2010, 15:55:41 »

During backups - we all know how important that is now Wink - the website will be unavailable. It will start around 21.30 CET (GMT+2), and lasts till 23.30 (or maximum 00:30). Please do not try to visit during the backup, as this will only slow things down and maybe even makes the system skip pages. My appologees for the inconvenience.

edit: I'm done Smiley All data is safe and you can use the website again!
Man that must have been the first time backups were ahead of schedule, 30 minutes early! Cheesy Cheesy
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 23:04:01 by RMF » Report Spam   Logged

^IO^RMF

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Tiny
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 101
Offline Offline

Posts: 2647


Fear Chickens!


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 11, 2010, 16:05:38 »

Apologees not accepted Tongue Grin
Report Spam   Logged

Don't kill this poor and tiny noob XD
RMF
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 36
Offline Offline

Posts: 2246


Rest in pieces!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2010, 19:05:56 »

wrrrrrrrr
Report Spam   Logged

^IO^RMF
Tiny
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 101
Offline Offline

Posts: 2647


Fear Chickens!


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2010, 20:46:36 »

Kitty? Huh? Grin Grin
Report Spam   Logged

Don't kill this poor and tiny noob XD
RMF
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 36
Offline Offline

Posts: 2246


Rest in pieces!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2010, 23:03:02 »

wut?
Report Spam   Logged

^IO^RMF
Tiny
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 101
Offline Offline

Posts: 2647


Fear Chickens!


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: September 12, 2010, 00:14:50 »

Nvm Cheesy Grin Grin
Report Spam   Logged

Don't kill this poor and tiny noob XD
RMF
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 36
Offline Offline

Posts: 2246


Rest in pieces!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2010, 00:39:08 »

Raw backup size: 991MB (95% or something are text files, didn't check)
Windows compression (not zip but whatever 'compressed disks' use): 473MB - compression time unknown, relatively zero
RAR compression: 12.4MB - compression time 2mins30secs (done with winrar)
ZIP compression: 151MB - compresssion time 40secs (done with winrar)
LZMA compression: 7.08MB - compression time 4mins (done with 7z)  /update: decompression time 40secs /update2: hm that was a first guess of the program, now I'm really unpacking it appears to be almost 3mins//
PPMd compression: 10.6MB - compression time 1m30s (done with 7z)
BZip2 compression: ... I'm not gonna wait for 12mins, not now (done with 7z)
Time to delete the Raw with windows (23900 files): 50secs, longer than extracting with LZMA Shocked

All compressed using the same password at highest possible compression level.

Odd Smiley Finally proven that rar powns zip, noone ever could really tell why except that it was "a little bit smaller". Never actually looked into any of the other compression techniques before, quite interresting to see the size vs time to compress (and vs time to decompress though there is only 1 to compare lol), and how small you can get the files knowing you almost had a gigabyte to start with and it now fits on 3 floppy's Shocked
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 19:00:52 by RMF » Report Spam   Logged

^IO^RMF
Tiny
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 101
Offline Offline

Posts: 2647


Fear Chickens!


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2010, 10:21:01 »

Nice job Cheesy
Report Spam   Logged

Don't kill this poor and tiny noob XD
Oleg
Clan members
Posts faster than his shadow
***

Awards: 25
Offline Offline

Posts: 378


NO WAR


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: September 12, 2010, 18:46:37 »

Tnx for interesting information! LZMA rulezzz Cheesy but it is a pity that u didnt wait bzip2 compression - it must be the best Wink thats why it is so long

edit - awarded;)
Report Spam   Logged
RMF
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 36
Offline Offline

Posts: 2246


Rest in pieces!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 12, 2010, 18:54:33 »

cool to have finally someone here who also is into such technical stuff Tongue I'm probably going to redo all compressing, but this time also check for CPU/MEM use and the decoding time.

Btw I've read a little about LZMA, and it appears it goes through the whole input data very often. Think that's why it is so slow - compared to some other algorithms at least.

edit:
Same raw data (ofcourse), now a bit better overview of compressing algorithms Smiley
  • BZip2: uses 4 cores, 99% nearly always. Barely ever reading anything, but when it does the CPU use drops to like 60-70%. Packed size: 24.3MB, not even close to LZMA while it takes 3 times as long Sad Unpack time just under 3 minutes.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 19:18:05 by RMF » Report Spam   Logged

^IO^RMF
Oleg
Clan members
Posts faster than his shadow
***

Awards: 25
Offline Offline

Posts: 378


NO WAR


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 12, 2010, 18:55:52 »

hehe , np mate Wink
Report Spam   Logged
Tiny
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 101
Offline Offline

Posts: 2647


Fear Chickens!


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2010, 21:33:47 »

Np too Wink Grin Grin
Report Spam   Logged

Don't kill this poor and tiny noob XD
Oleg
Clan members
Posts faster than his shadow
***

Awards: 25
Offline Offline

Posts: 378


NO WAR


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: September 13, 2010, 20:49:17 »

yea i read some about that too ( tnx luc for that Wink ). Indeed lzma is more effective...

but lzma is native format of 7z. so to be honest, try to make it with pbzip2 (it is bzip2, optimizated for mulit-core) or bzip2 (native utility), not with 7z. i think bzip2 must be a lil closer and compression must be faster (although lzma is more effective, of course Wink ) - look here http://compressionratings.com/comp.cgi?7-zip+9.12b++bzip2+1.0.5++pbzip2+1.0.5 - pay attention for %(comprassion ratio), C.Time(compression time), D.Time(decompression time), Time(total comp+decomp time)

/damn, link doesnt work correctly(without pbzip2 results), here is quote for lazy ppl
Quote
Program   Ver   %   C.Time    D.Time    Time
Summary    
7-zip   9.12b   24.4   891.84   103.83   16m 36s   
bzip2   1.0.5   34.1   468.09   167.03   10m 35s
pbzip2   1.0.5   34.2   145.67   49.27   3m 15s
« Last Edit: September 13, 2010, 20:59:58 by Oleg » Report Spam   Logged
RMF
Clan leaders
Should i stop?
*****

Awards: 36
Offline Offline

Posts: 2246


Rest in pieces!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 13, 2010, 22:00:45 »

hm I assume % is how much percent less, not how much percent of the original file (like 7z and winrar have)?
Report Spam   Logged

^IO^RMF
Oleg
Clan members
Posts faster than his shadow
***

Awards: 25
Offline Offline

Posts: 378


NO WAR


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 13, 2010, 22:22:24 »

its comression ratio. in the table best archievers have it less than worse ones, so  i think it is how much percents of original file, not how much percents less , if i undrestand u right Smiley so accordingly to this summary, in generally, lzma has better compression, but slower in compression
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


+--ignore-
Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy
Page created in 0.031 seconds with 10 queries.