> -----Original Message-----
> From: Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Geoff Worboys
> Sent: 16. maj 2005 11:32
> To: Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-Architect] Re: Record Encoding
>
> >> Do you have any reason to believe that there is
> significant overhead
> >> when compressing a pre-compressed object?
>
> > That needs checking, but zipping up a few 200k JPG and a
> few 10Mb TIFF
> > files - I can't see that there is any gain - in fact two of
> the TIFF's
> > came out bigger - just - in 12 and 14 seconds ;)
>
> I think Jim's point was not whether there was any gain, but
> whether there was any loss. eg: If the cost of compression
> is small enough then there would be no problem with doing it
> even when there is no benefit.
>

But compressing compressed data will in many cases turn out bigger. This is,
as far as I have understood it, strictly opposed to the intension which was
to minimize the number of pages used to store the data.

/smn