3 ms·
>Sure, but this is the installer presumably being loaded from CD/USB Doesn't have to be. You could also load it from HDD, which is probably rather common when
by faho 9y ago
>Sure, but this is the installer presumably being loaded from CD/USB
Doesn't have to be. You could also load it from HDD, which is probably rather common when we're talking about containers and such (and in other circumstances, the couple of MB you'd save here with xz hardly matter). Also there's this PXE thing that I don't understand.
> I wonder if that would boost your performance vs the uncompressed image (though I don’t know if the kernel supports lz4 decimal at boot time)?
It didn't last time I checked, but it seems like it does now. So I'll give that a go.
- faho 9y agoTurns out it's a wash. On my arch machine the uncompressed image is 27M, with lz4 it's 14M. Both take around 10s to desktop according to `systemd-analyze` (which includes 3s bootloader timeout). Though I did figure out that for some reason my system was running "lvm2-monitor.service", which took 1s all by itself for doing absolutely nothing (don't use lvm). So I masked that and gained more time than any compression method could.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoThank you very much for sharing those results!