Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
on ‎08-22-2012 09:04 AM

Care to share your results?

by Copper Super Contributor
on ‎08-22-2012 09:47 AM

I remember distinctly that a 1GB backup reduced to 700MB.  It does take longer and more CPU to compress though but that could be related to something we are doing.. not sure.


by Bronze Super Contributor
on ‎08-22-2012 04:05 PM

I'm a fan of 7-zip, if we had smaller compression sizes on RDB's that would be worth doing.

on ‎08-23-2012 08:29 AM

Worth a 30% longer creation time?

by Copper Super Contributor
on ‎08-23-2012 11:05 AM

Its definitely one of those things you have to weigh. We know two things are hopefully true...


1. Data will grow. so there is a + to having it not take up as much space when backed up because it multiplies as you have to keep backups for X number of days..

2. CPUs will get faster. so it may be 30% longer today, but in a year or two it wont evern be a discussion.. I assume..


on ‎08-23-2012 11:08 AM

I'm not discounting the value. Just don't know where to side. 


Hard drive capacity is growing just as fast (if not faster) than CPU. It's cheaper and easier to add HD space than to get a new processor. 



by Copper Super Contributor
on ‎08-23-2012 11:16 AM

What about ZIP format Size limitations, What are the new limits with the new ZIP format thats been in use since 10.2 .. and whats 7z limitations.. that might be a perspective worth looking into.