Re: Compression method recommendations?

On Thursday, September 9, 2021 6:07:28 PM CEST you wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 09 2021, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > John,
> > 
> > Thank you for this.
> > So, for dar, the commandline option would be " -zzstd:8 " ?
> > 
> > I don't see the " -T ", as that's for encryption?
> > I am talking about "dar" here.
> 
> Right, I should have been more clear.  The -T is a zstd option,
> not a dar one.  Yes, -zzstd:8 would be a pretty good ratio with
> pretty good performance.  You may experiment a bit; you could try
> 3, 8, and 14 or so and see what you like about the performance and
> size of each with your particular data set.  You might also try
> piping dar output through zstd -T0 to see what it does, but
> post-compressing a dar archive would cause you to lose many of the
> benefits of dar.
> 
> I don't immediately see a multithreaded compression option in the
> dar manpage.  However, --multi-thread implies that it MAY do this,
> but it says it's not been well tested and isn't encouraged for
> use.
> 
> - John

John,

Multi-threaded sounds nice, but not really necessary for my use-case.
I actually prefer this part being limited to a single thread, it leaves the 
rest to do the work the system is supposed to be doing.

I also read some comments that restoring the backup might need to be done 
using a similar setting, in which case I prefer to keep it to the "default".

@Denis, what's the current status of the multi-threading? Has it seen sufficient 
use yet to mark it as "reliable"? Or do you have specific test-scenarios in 
mind you would like me to try on a test environment over an extended period?

--
Joost