new | show | ask | jobs Github

order-matters 3 hours ago

Whats the assumption we can potentially target as reason for the counter-intuitive result?

that data in pdf files are noisy and zstd should perform better on noisy files?

▲

jeffbee 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What's counter-intuitive about this outcome?

▲

order-matters 2 hours ago | parent [-]

maybe that was too strongly worded but there was an expectation for zstd to outperform. So the fact it didnt means the result was unexpected. i generally find it helpful to understand why something performs better than expected.

▲

mort96 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Isn't zstd primarily designed to provide decent compression ratios at amazing speeds? The reason it's exciting is mainly that you can add compression to places where it didn't necessarily make sense before because it's almost free in terms of CPU and memory consumption. I don't think it has ever had a stated goal of beating compression ratio focused algorithms like brotli on compression ratio.

	▲	sgerenser an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I actually thought zstd was supposed to be better than Brotli in most cases, but a bit of searching reveals you're right... Brotli, especially at the highest compression levels (10/11), often exceeds zstd at the highest compression levels (20-22). Both are very slow at those levels, although perfectly suitable for "compress once, decompress many" applications which the PDF spec is obviously one of them.