Changes

To Thumb or Not to Thumb

455 bytes added, 20:05, 14 December 2010

→‎Project Details

Based on the benchmarks, in average, THUMB reduced the sizes about,<div>'''2.24%''' for *.rpm files,</div><div>'''7.67%''' for extracted directories, and</div><div>'''22.16%''' for executables, compared to NON-THUMB.</div><div>While it might save some disk space for executable files, it doesn't make a big different for rpm packages since rpm has it's own compressing mechanism.</div>

Compared to THUMB2, In average, THUMB produced files that are about,<div>'''0.24%''' for *.rpm files,</div><div>'''0.45%''' for extracted directories, and</div><div>'''1.86%''' for executables, greater than THUMB2.</div><div>I noticed that THUMB produces files that are almost as small as THUMB2's products.</div>

~~Compared to THUMB2~~Just based on file size comparison, In average, THUMB produced files that are about,<div>'''0.24%''' for *.rpm files,</div><div>'''0.45%''' for extracted directories, and</div><div>'''1.86%''' for executables, greater than THUMB2.</div><div>I noticed that THUMB ~~produces files that are almost as small as THUMB2's products~~does an excellent job shrinking the file size.~~</div>~~

Performance benchmarks showed too much fluctuation in the result to provide a firm answer. At this point, my conclusion is that THUMB does not greatly effect in software's performance, but it varies depending on software.

~~Just based on file size comparison~~So far I've seen more improvements than decrements from THUMB. As I'm aware of that more benchmarks are required before having an concrete answer, but for now it is safe to say that THUMB ~~does an excellent job shrinking the file size~~for Fedora-ARM is worth further development.

== Project News ==

Tyler.lee

1

edit

CDOT Wiki β

Changes

To Thumb or Not to Thumb

CDOT Wiki ^β