lz4 compression for mx

[anticapitalista]

How about decompression speed for lz4?
So when you boot the lz4 compressed iso, how fast does it boot? Any difference? Does it matter if user has an old(er) box, no ssd for example?

Seems that lz4 may well be useful for snapshots and persistence.

stsoh - please tell us more about live-usb with lz4.

bled - thanks for the info - very useful in the end once we realised you were not being trollish.

[Richard]

Speaker's of English as a second or third language do not always understand the nuances of what they say, and how it might be interpreted.

Good learning experience for all.

[stsoh]

...
stsoh - please tell us more about live-usb with lz4...

i'm bad at reviewing stuffs but i can say it is on par with installation on ssd.
btwn xz and lz4, my preference will be lz4.
i encourage all the test it, so u will know how good it is yourself.
there isn't any like glitch or halt as opening apps or watching video on utube.
i use MX live USB maker.

[richb]

Decidedly faster making a snapshot. About 2 plus minutes lz4 vs 7 minutes xz. About a 3 to 1 ratio as others have reported. File sizes were 3.2 GiB for xz and 5 GiB for lz4.
I have not installed the resulting iso to test install time.

[Eadwine Rose]

I would say it is only logical that it is a faster tool if it compresses less. More efficient compressing requires more time.

Personally.. compression should be proper compression. Not a half half solution that still leaves a big file. Might as well then copy it straight without compressing things... JMHO.

[richb]

I would say it is only logical that it is a faster tool if it compresses less. More efficient compressing requires more time.

Personally.. compression should be proper compression. Not a half half solution that still leaves a big file. Might as well then copy it straight without compressing things... JMHO.

Well a 3.5 GiB to 5.0 GiB seems a small price to pay for the speed. An uncompressed system would be significantly larger.

[Adrian]

Might as well then copy it straight without compressing things... JMHO.

It does compress, but not to the smallest possible even the one that we use by default on release ISO is not compressing to the smallest possible size, there are always tradeoffs. What's funny is that it looks faster than a simple copy, when you install MX it seems to take longer than creating an image that's what surprised me (the copy part of installation didn't take only one minute on this machine)

[Eadwine Rose]

Just wondering.. bit of a morbid bit of thinking here, but it has happened to me IRL the other way around, so... it is not unrealistic.


Suppose you compress the files.. pictures of yourself, your family, whatever... things you want to keep. Burn them to a dvd, usb, whatever rocks your boat. And then you die. Your house gets cleared out, hardware sold off, stuff put in boxes, storage.

And then a family member gets their hands on that disk, drive, whatever it was.. on there is written "photos 2018", and of course they want to have those!!

Can someone who uses windows still EASILY (remember we are talking basic users here) get to these files?

Compression is nice for software purposes, but there is the reason that I choose zip over other formats for some things.

[richb]

I would like all traces of me expunged when I die like I was not even here,

I know, off topic.

[Eadwine Rose]

First you'll have to make enemies out of everyone then