1 |
On 01/27/14 08:35, Steev Klimaszewski wrote: |
2 |
> On Sun, 2014-01-26 at 21:00 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: |
3 |
>> Hi again. |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> If someone is interested in the results of my tests and benchmarks, |
6 |
>> I've uploaded the initial version of my article on the topic in our |
7 |
>> dev-space. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/tmp/squashfs-deltas.pdf |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> I am terribly busy with the uni right now so it will take some time |
12 |
>> before I continue working on it. I will try to provide a final |
13 |
>> specification for the first attempt at the idea and ask infra if they |
14 |
>> are ready to sacrifice the hardware for it. |
15 |
>> |
16 |
>> Further possible improvements: |
17 |
>> |
18 |
>> 1. switch to LZ4 (stronger compression, even faster) -- will require |
19 |
>> a newer kernel (3.14?), |
20 |
>> |
21 |
it should be in kernel 3.11 "windows for workgroups" release (check anyway) |
22 |
|
23 |
> While the stronger compression, and being faster is definitely nice, |
24 |
> having portage on squashfs is really nice on ARM devices, however the |
25 |
> number of them that have a decently running kernel newer than 3.8 are |
26 |
> few and far between, so I'd like to ask that this be held off as long as |
27 |
> possible. I know these are just possible improvements, but doing so |
28 |
> would definitely alienate a really good place where this would shine. |
29 |
|
30 |
yes, there are good reasons also for amd64 |
31 |
|
32 |
> |
33 |
>> 2. dedicated SquashFS delta tool -- I'm working on it but |
34 |
>> the format seems to be poorly documented so it will take some time :). |
35 |
>> |
36 |
> |
37 |
> |