[Top] [All Lists]

Re: compressed content-transfer-encoding?

1999-07-29 08:14:20
On Thu, 29 Jul 1999 04:24:24 +0800, "Tim Kehres" said:
Above you also mention the online storage of the messages.   What is the
intent here?   Are we trying to save in disk space or bandwidth utilization
when the attachment is in transit.   I was assuming the later.    Saving a
couple hundred meg of disk space with the price of drives these days hardly
seems worth the effort.

I mentioned online storage only because I had statistics on the compression.
What an MUA does in its message store is of course its own business. ;)

I'm also distressed at this cavalier "with the cost of..." trend of late.

Some places run on tight budgets or have other constraints.  I turned
on disk compression on my worstation, and got back about 30% of the /home
space.  This saved me from having to buy a new disk drive.  So right
there, we've saved $200 just on the cost of the drive.  But there's more.

Remember to factor in the cost of my downtime while I back up my machine,
take it down, do all the needed recabling, replace the drive, boot it
up, and restore all the data from tape.  Add the cost of most of a day's
work for me.  Add in the cost of *tomorrow* being shot because I didn't
get stuff done today, so tomorrow I'm digging out from under today's backlog.

Suddenly, worrying about efficient use of disk space starts looking a
lot better - and makes a CPU and/or memory upgrades a lot cheaper in

And I've *got* disk compression software.  I don't have CPU compression
software. ;)

                                Valdis Kletnieks
                                Computer Systems Senior Engineer
                                Virginia Tech

Attachment: pgp3A7Iks1Z1M.pgp
Description: PGP signature