• From: "Alexander Philippou" <alex@n...>
• To: <noah_mendelsohn@u...>
• Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:09:26 +0300

> Thanks, but I think you missed my point.  I assume that the reason people
would use FI without gzip is mainly for speed.

People use FI for good compactness without suffering a processing penalty as
with gzip.

> I'm asking, when they use FI+gzip as shown below to get that extra 15% in
space compared to gzip FI by itself, am I right that they lose a lot of the
speed advantage that FI gave them originally? I'm not saying this is bad.
I'm suggesting:
> 
>         FI:  good speed, moderate compression
>         gzip:  very good compression, slow
>         FI + gzip: slightly better compression than gzip, slightly slower
than gzip

As an indication, gzip time can add 30%-500% to serialization time. In our
measurements [fi serialization + gzip compression] is generally slower than
[text serialization] but faster than [text + gzip]. Then again, if your FI
doc returns high compactness your [fi + gzip] can be as fast as [text].

> Noah Mendelsohn

Alexander

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Is it time for the binary XML permathread to start up again?
    • From: noah_mendelsohn@u...

• References:
  • RE: Is it time for the binary XML permathread to start up again?
    • From: noah_mendelsohn@u...