Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!ucdavis!csusac!unify!Unify.com!raveling
From: raveling@Unify.com (Paul Raveling)
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Subject: LHarc versus UNIX compress
Message-ID: <1991Mar29.093617@Unify.com>
Date: 29 Mar 91 17:36:17 GMT
Sender: news@Unify.Com (news admin)
Reply-To: raveling@Unify.com (Paul Raveling)
Organization: Unify Corporation, Sacramento, CA, USA
Lines: 42


	I just tried an early version of LHarc (V0.03) and got
	very disappointing results.  Is a more recent version
	available by email or by uucp?  Is there reason to believe
	a more recent version would improve this performance
	substantially?

	Alternatively, is there ANYTHING that provider about
	the same degree of compression as Unix "compress" but
	runs significantly faster than "compress"?

	Here are the results, clipped from a script file of
	running lharc and Unix compress on the same image file...

	Speed:

$ time lharc c i.lharc i.p
i.p - Freezing : 
....................................................................i.p
- Freezing : 
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooi.p
- Frozen(56%)
       32.4 real        30.6 user         0.6 sys  
$ time compress <i.p >i.p.Z
        6.7 real         6.1 user         0.5 sys  

	[lharc was 5 times slower than standard "compress"]


File       Size      Last Modify     UsrGrpOth   Owner    Group   
----       ----      -----------     ---------   -----    -----   

i.lharc  470069    Today  09:30:46   rw.rw.r..   raveling staff   
i.p      832882    Today  09:22:42   rw.r..r..   raveling staff   
i.p.Z    443923    Today  09:31:11   rw.rw.r..   raveling staff   

	[lharc produce a file about 6% larger than "compress"]


------------------
Paul Raveling
Raveling@Unify.com