Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    "Why can't tar be more like $x?"
    Because tar isn't $x.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Beans
    946

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    Quote Originally Posted by billgoldberg View Post
    Tar is great.

    But if I need to archive files, I like to compress them while I'm at it.

    And from what I've heard .7z is the best at that for the moment.
    It has the best compression ratio, but it's also one of the slowest.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    maybe tar just isnt the best format for your backups. Why not just use zip 7z, rar, ace, or any of those other formats which have 'easier' access to the metadata then tar does?
    Jabber: markgrandi[at]gmail.com

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Beans
    1,678
    Distro
    Kubuntu Development Release

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    Quote Originally Posted by descentspb View Post
    yes, sure, it does not do any compression, but i'm not talking about compression. Tar is great in all its functionality, but when you open a large tar file through the archive manager, you should wait till the system reads all the file to be able to look through the contents. Even in the obsolete zip you can view the contents quickly.
    You are asking the wrong question! When you have just a .gz or .bz2, it's a *single* file, compressed. When you have .tar.gz or .tar.bz2 or just .tar it's a bunch of files archived and *maybe* compressed (if .tar.gz or .tar.bz2). If file-roller is slow on uncompressed tars, that's file-roller's fault. It has *nothing* to do with tar's format.

    LinuxChix | Linux User #432169 | Ubuntu User #8495 | IRC: maco @ irc.linuxchix.org or irc.freenode.net

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    Almost every major enterprise backup solution still uses tar under the hood. Veritas/symantec, legato, arcserv.. Why? Because tar by itself *NOT* compression, its an archive, and can be line copied incredibly fast. Hardware compression is much more efficient.

    If its not broke, don't fix it? Is it obsolete? I dont see how it could be.
    "Its easy to come up with new ideas, the hard part is letting go of what worked for you two years ago, but will soon be out of date." -Roger von Oech

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    USA
    Beans
    1,043

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    I think the system has to decompress the tar/gz or tar/bz2 file before it can read its contents, hence the wait. Have you tried not compressing your tar files?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Beans
    671
    Distro
    Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    .tar.gz has never been slow for me. Even on my 400MHz Celeron.
    2010 IBM Thinkpad 510, 4GB RAM, i5-540M, NVS 3100M

    Running Ubuntu 11.04

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Beans
    137

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    Hmm. I don't have access to my linux system now, but i've tried to make a tar (without compression) in windows at work, and it seems that a tar without compression is read quickly. So this problem appears when using bz2 or gz compression. I think that it should be dealt with. Maybe it is a problem of the ubuntu archive manager?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Indiana
    Beans
    1,933
    Distro
    Hardy Heron (Ubuntu Development)

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    Quote Originally Posted by descentspb View Post
    Hmm. I don't have access to my linux system now, but i've tried to make a tar (without compression) in windows at work, and it seems that a tar without compression is read quickly. So this problem appears when using bz2 or gz compression. I think that it should be dealt with. Maybe it is a problem of the ubuntu archive manager?
    You haven't been reading this thread well. It is meant to be that way. With bz2 and gz, they opted for greater compression ratios over speed. They aren't meant to be fast, they're meant to be great compressors. They got their great compression ratios by compressing everything together, which means that it all has to be uncompressed before you can view it. That isn't something you need, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a demand for high compression at all.

    You said yourself that you don't need compression, so you need to just tar without compression.
    Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You. - Dr. Seuss

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Beans
    41
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron

    Re: Don't you think TAR is obsolete?

    If this is such a huge issue for you, why don't you compress then tar?



    Personally, I'd be mortified if tar went the way of the dodo. The lack of strange metadata structures is its power. Nothing like a corrupted lookup table to ruin your day.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •