Chester (lamchester.delete@this.gmail.com) on November 24, 2020 11:45 pm wrote:
> Foo_ (foo.delete@this.nomail.com) on November 24, 2020 2:34 am wrote:
> > Chester (lamchester.delete@this.gmail.com) on November 23, 2020 2:15 pm wrote:
> > > - 7z compression/decompression - 7z is far more popular than xz
> >
> > As already pointed out elsewhere, 7z and xz both use LZMA under the hood.
> > Of course, 7z may use more than LZMA, but talking about them
> > as if there were disjoint workloads doesn't make sense.
>
> Fair enough, they both use LZMA under the hood. That makes xz a touch
> more relevant. But then, why not test both like Phoronix does?
>
> > Besides, saying 7z is popular is extremely one-sided. 7z isn't popular at all
> > on Linux for example. And while Linux is not very common overall on the desktop,
> > it's quite common on the desktops of some categories of professionals.
>
> I was mostly focused on people buying machines for home use.
>
> But yeah, professional use is a completely different story. From what I've seen,
> companies will sample hardware and run their specific workload before buying
> a batch of servers. So review sites are probably less relevant to them.

Most important!
Both compression and decompression must be tested!
Sometimes they are not close in timings.