• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    966 months ago

    Zip makes different tradeoffs. Its compression is basically the same as gz, but you wouldn’t know it from the file sizes.

    Tar archives everything together, then compresses. The advantage is that there are more patterns available across all the files, so it can be compressed a lot more.

    Zip compresses individual files, then archives. The individual files aren’t going to be compressed as much because they aren’t handling patterns between files. The advantages are that an error early in the file won’t propagate to all the other files after it, and you can read a file in the middle without decompressing everything before it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      136 months ago

      Yeah that’s a rather important point that’s conveniently left out too often. I routinely extract individual files out of large archives. Pretty easy and quick with zip, painfully slow and inefficient with (most) tarballs.

    • fmstrat
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Nowhere in here do you cover bzip, the subject of this meme. And tar does not compress.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        76 months ago

        It’s just a different layer of compression. Better than gzip generally, but the tradeoffs are exactly the same.

        • fmstrat
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          Well, yes. But your original comment has inaccuracies due to those 2 points.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      Can you evaluate the directory tree of a tar without decompressing? Not sure if gzip/bzip2 preserve that.