Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Which archive software are we using in 2010 (and why)?

<< < (12/16) > >>

Shades:
No, not really. (over-)Eager database admins change always so much that a complete dump is necessary. 

if it was always the same database then I agree with your point...but unfortunately that isn't the case.

Deozaan:
(creating different archives per file or folder, and deleting the source files after compression are invaluable features)-Lashiec (August 10, 2010, 06:39 PM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks for reminding me of the only two features I miss from WinRAR.

However, a bit of investigation led me to an AHK script/utility called 7-Zip Each File. It's a lot easier than trying to figure out how to do it by command-line. The only thing it seems to be missing is the option to delete the source file after compressing.

tslim:
Your point is very true...with a high capacity connection.

However, I have to pull those files through a 512KBit connection which is costing about 120 USD/month. You can get cheaper, higher rated connections over here, but those lines here are really 'overbooked' and unreliable.  In my situation I simply lose too much time downloading. Besides that, my download is immediately ready to be stored on the least amount of DVD's.
-Shades (August 13, 2010, 10:06 PM)
--- End quote ---

I find your way of measuring efficiency odd...
1. It takes you longer to produce the smallest size zip but requires less download time.
or
2. It takes you longer to download a moderate size zip but saves you some compression time.

Either way, you are simply swithcing the "wait" between the 2 processes.

If the zip is prepared by someone else, then he/she always produces a bigger zip to save his/her time, that is a matter of his/her choice and should not be taken as a factor in determining WinRar's efficiency.

Shades:
Your point is very true...with a high capacity connection.

However, I have to pull those files through a 512KBit connection which is costing about 120 USD/month. You can get cheaper, higher rated connections over here, but those lines here are really 'overbooked' and unreliable.  In my situation I simply lose too much time downloading. Besides that, my download is immediately ready to be stored on the least amount of DVD's.
-Shades (August 13, 2010, 10:06 PM)
--- End quote ---

I find your way of measuring efficiency odd...
1. It takes you longer to produce the smallest size zip but requires less download time.
or
2. It takes you longer to download a moderate size zip but saves you some compression time.

Either way, you are simply swithcing the "wait" between the 2 processes.

If the zip is prepared by someone else, then he/she always produces a bigger zip to save his/her time, that is a matter of his/her choice and should not be taken as a factor in determining WinRar's efficiency.

-tslim (August 17, 2010, 03:23 PM)
--- End quote ---

Granted, you have a point there...if you are using a system (or work-flow) where the bottleneck is almost the same size than the rest of the system.

However you do not seem to grok that the bottleneck in my complete work-flow is the internet connection...let me clarify with an example. Imagine a bucket of water, an empty bucket similar to the first one and a straw to get the water from one bucket to the other.

I use a VPN connection to let a quad core PC create the archive in 2 to 2,5 hours the download will take an x amount of time. Downloading the moderately compressed archive easily takes x + 6 to 8 hours more (if I am lucky, internet here in Paraguay is really not as stable, as in the northern hemisphere of the globe...even with business subscriptions).

Over here I use an i7 PC that takes 30 to 40 minutes to unpack the highly compressed archive and I am already way into the importing process when the moderately compressed would be in. As I am paid by the hour, my benefactor does not complain at all.

Besides that, with all the computing power that is available in modern PC's, do you really think it should be wasted by playing the latest games or editing/encoding your home video alone?







 

Tuxman:
I switched from PowerArchiver to WinRAR when it became payware until I found 7-Zip some years ago.
Sticking with .7z (LZMA2 is fine) for most purposes, rather exotic file types are handled by IZArc (yes, I still do work with .ace archives every now and then).

Although I'm quite sure that PAQ8 is still the strongest compression algorithm, it lacks speed. Would probably prefer it to .7z else.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page