> I wouldn't bother to compress - just putting all the files into a
> ``tarball'' will compress them quite nicely because of the lack of
> fragmentation. Compression isn't the point, disk access / file
> read is the point. For a large group of small files I want 2 disk
> accesses (inode + tarball) for all files, instead of 2/file.
How's that? First of all, tar pads out each file according to the
blocking factor, and secondly, tar has a rather verbose header in
front of each file.
-- Harvey J. Stein BFM Financial Research hjstein@bfr.co.il- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/