in reply to Zipping the contents of a directory by filename
”…a few hundred PDF's…”
One more thing occurred to me: PDFs can hardly be compressed at all. I've just tried it out, a 27k PDF becomes a 25k PDF, for example - not really interesting. And since there are so many of them, performance probably plays a bit of a role. In my opinion, it would be more natural to use tar or rather Archive::Tar. I haven't measured it, but it probably performs much better. Just as an aside and as a reminder: There are these age-old comparisons of the performance of cp, rsync and tar. As far as I remember, tar has always performed better than zip for operations on many files. I know - there is no compression involved, but just as a general statement on the good performance of tar.
Minor update: striked out irrelevant content.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^2: Zipping the contents of a directory by filename
by jeffenstein (Hermit) on Jun 02, 2025 at 13:09 UTC | |
by karlgoethebier (Abbot) on Jun 02, 2025 at 15:29 UTC |