3 ms·
The CertSimple article completely ignores CPU and memory usage. That is where Brotli can become completely unacceptable for dynamic compression – it uses vastly
by Solar19 8y ago
The CertSimple article completely ignores CPU and memory usage. That is where Brotli can become completely unacceptable for dynamic compression – it uses vastly more CPU and RAM than gzip.
Brotli is fine if you can precompress static files on a prep server or desktop.
It's unprofessional and unscientific to evaluate compression codecs without measuring how much CPU and memory they use. Brotli is a disappointment, coming 20 years after gzip. In 20 years we should expect something better than Brotli, something that is better optimized for modern CPUs, vectorized by default, and with a much better dictionary.
- JoachimSchipper 8y agoCPU usage (but not memory usage) seems to be addressed by the section "Brotli can compress faster than gzip and still produce smaller files", quoting https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/02/understanding-brotlis-potential.html https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/02/understanding-brotlis-poten...?
- d33 8y agoHow about zstd? https://github.com/facebook/zstd https://github.com/facebook/zstd
- joosters 8y agoI find zstd to be almost twice the speed of brotli when compressing files (my simple test case is a 55M directory of small files - about 2k each) However, zstd doesn't have the browser support that brotli does. So you can't easily replace brotli with zstd for web use.
- JyrkiAlakuijala 8y agoZstd compresses 5% less densely. Zstd compresses slower to a given density. Decoding zstd may use 128 mb of ram whereas Brotli may use up to 16 mb.
- KirinDave 8y agoIsn't it like within 10% of the default gzip settings in every case?