similar to: [Bug 9815] New: Compression tuning parameters

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9864 Summary: Allow permanent compression of destination files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: me at haravikk.com

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10581 Summary: --fuzzy-delay and --fuzzy-limit for fuzzy match tuning Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: samba at

Folks, I'd like to get expert's opinion on which compression level is suitable for lld's -compress-debug-section=zlib option, which let the linker compress .debug_* sections using zlib. Currently, lld uses compression level 9 which produces the smallest output in exchange for a longer link time. My question is, is this what people actually want? We didn't consciously choose

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10621 Summary: Allow Filter Rule Imports Relative to Importer Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: samba at

Also not an expert, but would it make sense for this to be configurable at a fine-grained level, perhaps with another option, or an extension to the compress-debug-sections switch interface? That way users who care about the finer details can configure it themselves. And we should pick sensible options for the default. James On 2 August 2018 at 11:08, Pavel Labath via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I've added lzo compression support for tinc 1.0pre8. Lzo is a very fast compressor (see http://www.oberhumer.com/opensource/lzo/). I've implemented it by using two new compression levels. Compression level 10 is for fast compression using lzo1x-1 algorithm. Compression level 11 is for slow compression using lzo1x-999 algorithm.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9814 Summary: --cache parameter for storing recent file data Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: me at haravikk.com

Hi Rui, What's the intended advantage for compressing the debug sections? - (i) Improved link time through smaller IO / (ii) Improved Load / startup time for the debugger / (iii) Smaller exe with debug info for distribution / disk space? For i) and ii) how much this is worth it depends on balance of storage bandwidth to compression (i) / decompression (ii) bandwidth. For spinning drives it

2.4.18 kernel) using 3 x 60GB WD 7200 IDE drives on a 7500-4 controller I could get peak I/O of 452 MBytes/sec, and a sustainable I/O rate of over 100 MBytes/sec. That is not exactly a 'dunno' performance situation. These tests were done using dbench and RAID5. Let's get that right: 100 MBytes/sec == 800 Mbits/sec, which is just a tad over 100 Mbits/sec (the bottleneck if you use

Dear R-experts, Here below a toy example with some error messages, especially at the end of the code (Tuning the parameters). Your help to correct my R code would be highly appreciated. ####################################### #libraries library(lattice) library(ggplot2) library(caret) library(randomForest) ?? #Data

> As to (3), in most cases, I believe it is rare to distribute executables with debug info widely > I think it is at least less important than (1). Agreed. > I think (1) is definitely the case, and that's also true for a distributed build system with which a lot of object files are copied between machines. > My suggestion was to use compression level 9 when both -O2 and

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14081 Bug ID: 14081 Summary: --copy-command option for specifying custom file copying behaviour Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core

Hi - there's a flag for rsync to compress the files in transit - is it possible to compress one side (target) with gzip and have rsync still work correctly? Any help would be appreciated. -- Ken

Not really, as well as some sensitivity to the input data overall performance of the link with compression will depend on how this is implemented in lld - how is it parallelized? How is it chunked? Is it effectively pipelined with IO? Or, I wouldn't feel comfortable being able to make a recommendation to our end-users on whether to use this option or not based on my existing extensive

When memory is low, ext3 gets a bit sluggish cursor getting jumpy etc. I say ext3 because I don't see a similar behavior with ext2. What are the ext3 tuning variables that I can try? For example, I see a message like "commit interval 5 seconds" in /var/log/dmesg.

Hi, Is there a way in which rsync's -z compression (zlib) utility can be benchmarked? I'm trying to compare the compression ratio between rsync and external compression tools like gzip and bzip2. Are there any advantages to using rsync's internal compression mechanism specified with the -z option compared to solely applying external compression i.e. bzip2 to the files and invoking

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10579 Summary: --xattr internal abbrev error Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: samba at haravikk.com

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10575 Summary: Long Delay for Large Folders Even with Incremental File-List Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10449 Summary: Allow testing of supported parameter(s) Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: me at haravikk.com

From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian at breakpoint.cc> zstd compression was announced as "good compression with high throughput" so I gave it a try. With zlib, on high speed links the CPU is usually the bottle neck. With zstd I'm able to fill a 200Mbit link :) zstd detection happens automatically via pkg-config. No zstd header means no error about missing zstd. So that