Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!necntc!auspyr!joe
From: joe@auspyr.UUCP (Joe Angelo)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Proposal: compressing news in the spool directories
Message-ID: <4134@auspyr.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 16-Apr-87 18:37:02 EST
Article-I.D.: auspyr.4134
Posted: Thu Apr 16 18:37:02 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 19-Apr-87 09:43:43 EST
References: <536@vixie.UUCP>
Distribution: world
Organization: Austec, Inc., San Jose, CA. USA
Lines: 26

in article <536@vixie.UUCP>, paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) says:
> 
> What about compressing the news data in the spool directories?  If compress
> can save half the transmission time, it ought to be able to save almost that
> much in the storage costs as well.  It isn't quite the same win, since there
> is the file system's frag size to consider -- but it's a win, just the same.
> 


It's a great idea ... but on the other hand, is the decompression-to-read
time worth it?  I mean, sure, compressing, batching, and then uncompressing
would waste alot of CPU time *if* your proposal were implemented, but that
wasted time would be nothing when measured against the CPU time of decompressing
the same message for 50 net-news readers (people); not to forget that THEY
have to wait for the decompression as well! It seams to me that decompressing
500 messages X 50 users tends to use more CPU time then decompressing all
of them once.

As things are going ... communication costs are certainly more expensive
(money wise) than disk storage, so what's the problem? 

-- 
"No matter      Joe Angelo, Sr. Sys. Engineer @ Austec, Inc., San Jose, CA.
where you go,   ARPA: aussjo!joe@lll-tis-b.arpa       PHONE: [408] 279-5533
there you       UUCP: {sdencore,cbosgd,amdahl,ptsfa,dana}!aussjo!joe
are ..."        UUCP: {styx,imagen,dlb,jmr,sci,altnet}!auspyr!joe