Subj : Re: Compression in Binkd
To   : Michiel van der Vlist
From : Wilfred van Velzen
Date : Thu Jan 28 2016 09:37 am

Hi Michiel,

On 27 Jan 16 22:43, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:
  about: "Compression in Binkd":

 MvdV>>> Yeah, it made a just in time, same as last week pointlist
 MvdV>>> segment to be delivered five minutes late.

 WV>> ... And it missed the deadline.

 MvdV> Big deal since it was the same as last week's...

That's not important, it could have mattered!

 WV>> Bandwith is still a limited resource and more expensive than computer
 WV>> cycles. Afaik data transfer is still metered by the byte on the
 WV>> peering level. So you might not pay for it directly. But it probably
 WV>> makes a difference how much data is transfered by all their customers
 WV>> combined, what internet providers will have to charge as monthly
 WV>> subscription rate...

 MvdV> True, but the traffic generated by fidonet is neglegible compared to all
 MvdV> the other traffic.

That's like saying your not going to vote because your single vote wouldn't 
change the outcome of an election. That's "true" also...

 MvdV> Also I wonder if binkd compression would have made any difference in
 MvdV> the incident you metioned. I send a large compressed file, but made
 MvdV> an unlucky choice for the compressor. Could the binkd compression
 MvdV> have compensated for that? Maybe, but it would not have, since it is
 MvdV> configured to not try to compress already compressed files.

It might have made a difference if you didn't compress it all, but not nearly 
as much as the 70x that 7zip improved on it. But your current mingw version of 
binkd only supports zip compression not bzip2 compression, so than it wouldn't 
have mattered...

Wilfred.

--- FMail-W32-1.69.10.141-B20151003
 * Origin:  point@work  (2:280/464.112)

.