With the right code, NTFS is not much slower than ext4, for example. Nearly 3% for tar.gz and more than 30% for a heavily multi-threaded use like Pack. https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,66281.m...
SQLite can be faster than FileSystem for small files. For big files, it can do more than 1 GB/s. On Pack [1], I benchmarked these speeds, and you can go very fast. It can be even 2X faster than tar [2]. In my opinion,…
Then `--press=hard` would be the choice for you.
Yes, I am. Pack can hold millions of files with no problem. One field in which it shines is that, aside from being fast at processing large amounts of data, it can process many small files much faster than similar tools…
What are the parameters you gave to the CLI program? This issue seems interesting, as these files on Windows 11 were tested countless times. To be clear, you can run Pack as: `pack.exe ./linux-master/`
Pack binary? Can you tell what machine and what steps? Build.sh can be used for Windows too, using MSYS2 UCRT64.
It is not disabled, as you think. It is secured by the internal code in Pack. Almost all parts of Pack are multithreaded.
Thank you! Exposure comes from enthusiasts like you. I did not want to focus the point on speed, or say, "Look, others are bad". They are great; my point was, "Look what we can do if we update our design and code". Pack…
I am happy to hear that, and I really appreciate your interest. Did you compile it for yourself? Any problem or steps you used, I will be happy to hear, o at pack.ac or GitHub, as it is hard to follow the building here.…
You are one of the bravest. And you know that, using SQLite as the base storage, rules out many of the security problems we can face. Anyone needing to reimplement Pack, can do it, very easily, if not easier than…
I answered this question here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39801083 If that is not enough, let me know. 7-Zip with the ZSTD patch is good too, but Pack is much faster at handling many files. Testing packing the…
Thank you very much! I guess you are friend with colors ;)
Indeed. Benchmarking Pack as a file system was fun. It is near 10X faster to let you iterate all the files compared to what I get from NTFS (warm with all caching on for both solutions). Someday, it can be used as a…
You may like to read https://pack.ac/note/pack and test it for yourself.
As far as I know, PAQ strives to give the best compression for archival purposes. Pack, on the other hand, tries to give the best compression, while keeping speed as instantaneous as possible. You should try them for…
Sorry. Site is very new, and custom made, and needs to be worked on mobile.
It looks clean and pseudocode-like. It helps readers from around the world with different languages understand. FreePascal compiler is very good too.
Hey, The choice of parameters was solely done to be clear, and not what people used to. -f meaning force is not clear; -w meaning overwrite, seemed like a better logical choice, to me. Nice point on -h. Yes, I did not…
More documentation will be published soon. For now and about CLI: https://pack.ac/cli-documentation
Reading many files (81K in this test) is way slower than reading just one big file. For bigger files, Pack is much faster. Here is a link to some results from a kind contributor:…
Me. It is the point: if you trust a project based on "who" made it, my friend, that is the start of the big problem we are facing in this current situation of tech. Just look at the code, build it yourself, and check…
Thank you so much for the kind words, refreshing. Here is the latest sqlar result on Linux source code on the same test machine in warm state: sqlar: 268 MB, 30.5 s Pack: 194 MB, 1.3 s Very good result compared to…
Hello David, and thank you for your comment, analysis, and the issues you opened. I will get to them all. - SQLite tooling: You will not need it unless you are debugging something, then you can change the header or just…
A couple, but simple. No, you will only need Pack, everything is built into it. Pack is built for Windows and Linux, and more will come. You will be able to run it on almost all CPUs.
It was hard to believe for me, too. And I didn't stumble upon it; I looked for it closely, and that was a point in the note. People did not look properly for nearly three decades. Many things have changed, but we…
With the right code, NTFS is not much slower than ext4, for example. Nearly 3% for tar.gz and more than 30% for a heavily multi-threaded use like Pack. https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,66281.m...
SQLite can be faster than FileSystem for small files. For big files, it can do more than 1 GB/s. On Pack [1], I benchmarked these speeds, and you can go very fast. It can be even 2X faster than tar [2]. In my opinion,…
Then `--press=hard` would be the choice for you.
Yes, I am. Pack can hold millions of files with no problem. One field in which it shines is that, aside from being fast at processing large amounts of data, it can process many small files much faster than similar tools…
What are the parameters you gave to the CLI program? This issue seems interesting, as these files on Windows 11 were tested countless times. To be clear, you can run Pack as: `pack.exe ./linux-master/`
Pack binary? Can you tell what machine and what steps? Build.sh can be used for Windows too, using MSYS2 UCRT64.
It is not disabled, as you think. It is secured by the internal code in Pack. Almost all parts of Pack are multithreaded.
Thank you! Exposure comes from enthusiasts like you. I did not want to focus the point on speed, or say, "Look, others are bad". They are great; my point was, "Look what we can do if we update our design and code". Pack…
I am happy to hear that, and I really appreciate your interest. Did you compile it for yourself? Any problem or steps you used, I will be happy to hear, o at pack.ac or GitHub, as it is hard to follow the building here.…
You are one of the bravest. And you know that, using SQLite as the base storage, rules out many of the security problems we can face. Anyone needing to reimplement Pack, can do it, very easily, if not easier than…
I answered this question here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39801083 If that is not enough, let me know. 7-Zip with the ZSTD patch is good too, but Pack is much faster at handling many files. Testing packing the…
Thank you very much! I guess you are friend with colors ;)
Indeed. Benchmarking Pack as a file system was fun. It is near 10X faster to let you iterate all the files compared to what I get from NTFS (warm with all caching on for both solutions). Someday, it can be used as a…
You may like to read https://pack.ac/note/pack and test it for yourself.
As far as I know, PAQ strives to give the best compression for archival purposes. Pack, on the other hand, tries to give the best compression, while keeping speed as instantaneous as possible. You should try them for…
Sorry. Site is very new, and custom made, and needs to be worked on mobile.
It looks clean and pseudocode-like. It helps readers from around the world with different languages understand. FreePascal compiler is very good too.
Hey, The choice of parameters was solely done to be clear, and not what people used to. -f meaning force is not clear; -w meaning overwrite, seemed like a better logical choice, to me. Nice point on -h. Yes, I did not…
More documentation will be published soon. For now and about CLI: https://pack.ac/cli-documentation
Reading many files (81K in this test) is way slower than reading just one big file. For bigger files, Pack is much faster. Here is a link to some results from a kind contributor:…
Me. It is the point: if you trust a project based on "who" made it, my friend, that is the start of the big problem we are facing in this current situation of tech. Just look at the code, build it yourself, and check…
Thank you so much for the kind words, refreshing. Here is the latest sqlar result on Linux source code on the same test machine in warm state: sqlar: 268 MB, 30.5 s Pack: 194 MB, 1.3 s Very good result compared to…
Hello David, and thank you for your comment, analysis, and the issues you opened. I will get to them all. - SQLite tooling: You will not need it unless you are debugging something, then you can change the header or just…
A couple, but simple. No, you will only need Pack, everything is built into it. Pack is built for Windows and Linux, and more will come. You will be able to run it on almost all CPUs.
It was hard to believe for me, too. And I didn't stumble upon it; I looked for it closely, and that was a point in the note. People did not look properly for nearly three decades. Many things have changed, but we…