Jim Starkey wrote:

> The machine was 768MB 1.3GHz Athlon. The machine while decompressing
> was, in the venacular, beat to shit.
>
> I'm losing my enthusiasm for compressed blobs. I'm not convinced the
> big win is there.

I'll switch sides then ;)
There ARE big win's for compressing blobs, but not when the data is
already compressed. Which is what some of us have been saying.

Looking at the figures you supplied, then MOST of your data was already
reasonably compact. If you take some 'uncompressed' data and do the same
exercise I think the results would be different.

XML files for instance add lots of 'crap and packing', and compress 10
to 1, or the full PHP manual in html goes down 5 to 1, but if it is
already in 'windows help' format (chm) then it actually goes UP when
compressed.

The bottom line is we would like to be in control! How many of those
msword and pdf files can you actually do a search on IN the blob? I
would expect to have to build a text version of them that can can use (
which is what *I* am doing now ;) ) and THAT blob will benefit from
compression SOMEWHERE in the system? Of cause someone more clever than
me would probably have a solution on searching the originals ?

--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services