4 ms·
base64 random data would be that bad only because of base64. Random data does not compress at all on average. As an example, I have zstd enabled on some zfs po
by cdavid 4y ago
base64 random data would be that bad only because of base64. Random data does not compress at all on average.
As an example, I have zstd enabled on some zfs pool. The client-side encrypted time machine backups does not even compress 1 %, as expected.
- lazide 4y agoYes, that’s why I said that? You can’t embed binary data in xml raw, so a common pattern is embedding it as base64, or similar type of wrapping. Technically, it’s possible to escape it in other ways, but it’s error prone. Either way, XML which has text strings or whatever typical XML document data that ISN’T something like base64 encoded random data should compress dramatically better than what the poster was talking about. So, what the hell is in your XML anyway?