I've been doing a bit of compression performance testing related to some possible MySQL development (think "better compressed MyISAM tables") and was shocked at the difference between gzip and bzip2.
Given a MyISAM data file of roughly 2,661,512 (or 2.5GB), I compressed it using both gzip and bzip2 using their respective -9 options to achieve maximal compression and timed each. I did this twice. I then decompressed the resulting file to stdout and sent the results to /dev/null and timed that too. The times are in mm:ss and the size is in KB.
|comp time||comp. size||decomp time|
Needless to say, I was blown away by the results. It's clear that bzip2 produces smaller compressed files but it does so at a very big cost--especially if you're thinking of using it in an application that requires frequent decompression. It's one thing to compress files and not look at them again for a few years. But we're talking about compressed tables that'd see lots of use.
Posted by jzawodn at August 26, 2003 04:26 PM