Re: Faster compression, again - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

Well, the patent argument, used like this, looks like a wild card, which can be freely interpreted as a mortal danger
forsome, and a non-issue for others. A perfect scare-mongerer.<br />Quite frankly, I don't buy that one implementation
issafer because there is "Google backing it". I can't think of any reason why byte-aligned LZ77 algorithm could face
anyrisk. And btw, just look at the number of companies which had to pay protection money to Microsoft or face
litigationwith Apple because they were using Google's Android. It looks to me that Google is more a magnet for such
dangersthan a protector.<br /><br />Regarding test tools : Yes, this is correct, Snappy C has more fuzzer tools
providedwithin the package.<br /><br />Regarding integration to BTRFS, and therefore into Linux, both implementation
lookon equal terms. I haven't seen anything which tells that one has more chances than the other being part of Linux
3.5.In fact, maybe both will be integrated at the same time.<br /><br />However, a little publicized fact is that quite
afew people tried both implementation (Snappy C and LZ4), and there were more failures/difficulties reported on Snappy
C.It doesn't mean that Snappy C is bad, just more complex to use. It seems that the LZ4 implementation is more
straightforward: less dependancies, less risks, less time spent to properly optimize it, <br /> well, in a word,
simpler.<br/><br /><br /><br /><div class="gmail_quote">Le 5 avril 2012 01:11, Daniel Farina-4 [via PostgreSQL] <span
dir="ltr"><<ahref="/user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5619870&i=0" link="external" rel="nofollow"
target="_top">[hiddenemail]</a>></span> a écrit :<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 7:29 AM,
Huchev<<a href="http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5619199&i=0" link="external" rel="nofollow"
target="_blank">[hiddenemail]</a>> wrote: <br />> For a C implementation, it could interesting to consider LZ4
algorithm,since <br />> it is written natively in this language. In contrast, Snappy has been ported <br />> to C
byAndy from the original C++ Google code, which lso translate into <br />> less extensive usage and tests. <br /><br
/>Fromwhat I can tell, the C implementation of snappy has more tests <br />than this LZ4 implementation, including a
fuzztester.  It's a <br />maintained part of Linux as well, and used for btrfs --- this is why <br />it was ported.
 Thehigh compression version of LZ4 is apparently <br />LGPL.  And, finally, there is the issue of patents: snappy has
several<br />multi-billion dollar companies that can be held liable (originator <br />Google, as well as anyone
connectedto Linux), and to the best of my <br />knowledge, nobody has been held to extortion yet. <br /><br />Consider
meunconvinced as to this line of argument. <br /><br />-- <br />fdr <br /><br /></div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font
color="#888888">--<br />Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (<a
href="http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5619199&i=1"link="external" rel="nofollow"
target="_blank">[hiddenemail]</a>) <br />To make changes to your subscription: <br /><a
href="http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers"link="external" rel="nofollow"
target="_blank">http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers</a><br/><br /><br /><hr color="#cccccc" noshade
size="1"/><div style="color:#444;font:12px tahoma,geneva,helvetica,arial,sans-serif"><div style="font-weight:bold">If
youreply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:</div><a
href="http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Faster-compression-again-tp5565675p5619199.html"link="external"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank">http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Faster-compression-again-tp5565675p5619199.html</a></div><div
style="color:#666;font:11pxtahoma,geneva,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;margin-top:.4em;line-height:1.5em"> To unsubscribe
fromFaster compression, again, <a href="" link="external" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">click here</a>.<br /><a
href="http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml"
link="external"rel="nofollow" style="font:9px serif" target="_blank">NAML</a></div></font></span></blockquote></div><br
/><br/><hr align="left" width="300" /> View this message in context: <a
href="http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Faster-compression-again-tp5565675p5619870.html">Re:Faster compression,
again</a><br/> Sent from the <a
href="http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/PostgreSQL-hackers-f1928748.html">PostgreSQL- hackers mailing list
archive</a>at Nabble.com.<br />