4 ms·
This is more of a replacement for deflate / gzip. You can use zstandard inside a zip file using compression type 20, as of zip v6.3.7 (2020), but I suspect not
by dietrichepp 4y ago
This is more of a replacement for deflate / gzip. You can use zstandard inside a zip file using compression type 20, as of zip v6.3.7 (2020), but I suspect not much software will be able to decompress it.
Seen a number of gzip replacements go by, like .bz2 (smaller but requires lots of CPU), .lzma and .xz (strictly an improvement over .bz2), and some others. Zstandard is a fairly solid improvement over these for similar use cases so I think it will get adopted. There's also the "extreme" compression algorithms like .lz4 (extremely fast, don't care about compression ratio) or PPMD (extremely slow, care deeply about compression ratio). My sense is that a large number of projects migrated to .bz2 and then to .xz over the years, and maybe we'll see more .zstd cropping up.
- formerly_proven 4y agohttps://archlinux.org/news/now-using-zstandard-instead-of-xz-for-package-compression/ https://archlinux.org/news/now-using-zstandard-instead-of-xz... In particular > [going from xz/lzma to zstd] yields a total ~0.8% increase in package size on all of our packages combined, but the decompression time for all packages saw a ~1300% speedup.
- zaarn 4y agoI think personally, the biggest factor for using zstd is that compression settings don't matter for the decompression speed. Doesn't matter if I used zstd-fast or zstd-19 the read speed is the same. Hence a lot of linux distros adopt it for packaging; they spent a few days of CPU time compressing their packages on zstd-19 (archlinux does IIRC), the user couldn't tell that it's been hard compressed like that.