Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Support For Compressing The Linux Kernel With LZ4

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    Perhaps you are thinking of ZFS. ZFSOnLinux HEAD has LZ4 support. I believe that btrfs had planned to adopt snappy. The two compression algorithms are roughly equivalent in benchmarks.
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTA1OTQ

    looks like lz4 is about 25 to 30% faster than snappy.
    Last edited by mercutio; 02-01-2013, 05:50 PM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by mercutio View Post
      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTA1OTQ

      looks like lz4 is about 25 to 30% faster than snappy.
      I had recalled reading the following when saying that the two were roughly equivalent:

      http://extrememoderate.wordpress.com...ession-part-1/

      The LZ4 website has benchmarks that are probably more accurate:

      http://code.google.com/p/lz4/

      According to them, LZ4 is faster than Snappy. The compression rate is 45% higher while the decompression rate is 26% higher. The compression ratio of LZ4 is also slightly higher than that of snappy.

      With that said, it appears that btrfs support for both Snappy and LZ4 has not been merged:

      https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index....merged_Patches

      Gentoo Linux's ZFS kernel modules gained support for LZ4 two days ago. Gentoo's GRUB package was updated with support for booting off LZ4 compressed ZFS /boot datasets yesterday. People interested in filesystems that support LZ4 compression could always try ZFS.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by ryao View Post
        I had recalled reading the following when saying that the two were roughly equivalent:

        http://extrememoderate.wordpress.com...ession-part-1/

        The LZ4 website has benchmarks that are probably more accurate:

        http://code.google.com/p/lz4/

        According to them, LZ4 is faster than Snappy. The compression rate is 45% higher while the decompression rate is 26% higher. The compression ratio of LZ4 is also slightly higher than that of snappy.
        I wonder how it compares on cellphones. (slow cpu with little cache)

        With that said, it appears that btrfs support for both Snappy and LZ4 has not been merged:

        https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index....merged_Patches
        Damnit

        Gentoo Linux's ZFS kernel modules gained support for LZ4 two days ago. Gentoo's GRUB package was updated with support for booting off LZ4 compressed ZFS /boot datasets yesterday. People interested in filesystems that support LZ4 compression could always try ZFS.
        Been using ZFS with LZJB compression on OpenIndiana. Looking forward to LZ4...
        Last edited by mercutio; 02-04-2013, 07:56 PM.

        Comment


        • #14
          Anyon know of a bench against latest LZO 2.06 or better ? And if Pcompress http://moinakg.wordpress.com/tag/pcompress/ performance tweaks are applied to this vesion of LZ4?

          Comment


          • #15
            Some recent tests in the LKML list: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/26/361

            armv7 (Cortex-A9), Linaro gcc-4.6 -O3, Silesia test corpus, 256 kB block-size:

            compression speed decompression speed

            LZO-2012 : 44 MB/sec 117 MB/sec no unaligned access
            LZO-2013-UA : 47 MB/sec 167 MB/sec Unaligned Access
            LZ4 r88 UA : 46 MB/sec 154 MB/sec Unaligned Access

            ~Markus

            Comment

            Working...
            X