Am 13.01.2021 um 01:20 schrieb Allin Cottrell:
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021, Sven Schreiber wrote:
> If I use the old missings choice, that brings me back to the question
> about compression, because:
> - old missings, compression level 0, gdtb: 25900KB
> - old missings, compression level 1, gdtb: 25900KB
> How is this same number of KB possible?
That'll happen if, when minimal (> 0) computational resources are
devoted to finding matching strings across successive 32k blocks of
data, nothing useful is found. See Mark Adler's response at
OK, picking this up in the context of gdtb format (but not with
different missing representation). With a Jan 19th snapshot I have saved
a file always in the current gdtb format, and with compression settings
0 (none/min), 5, 9 (max), and I get exactly the same resulting file
size. Am I too naive to expect a difference between settings 0 and 9 ?
Or if the setting doesn't apply to the current gdtb format, perhaps it
should be greyed out? I'm noticing that the reference for the store
command doesn't mention any compression for gdtb (only for gdt).