On Monday 28 May 2007 04:37:04 Nitin Gupta wrote:
> On 5/28/07, Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> As you mentioned in your mail, you are using lzo1x_1_11_compress()
> which is slower than what I ported (which is same as what is exported
> by miniLZO). So, can you please test with the version ported - this
> is found in lzo/src/lzo1x_1.c (or in minilzo.c).
> Also, can you please use 'take 5' for your next testing?
>
> Thanks,
> Nitin
Will do. (that's DBITS=15, correct?)
However, when I averaged it 100 times, lzo1x_1_11_compress() showed better
speed than your implementation - about 1.5% faster.
The *unsafe*-
decompressor, however, only shows about a 1.2% speed advantage over the safe
decompressor.
DRH