Re^8: Very Large Hex Combinations

I don't know where you get your 246 bytes from

Windows Bitmap.

But you don't have to store them in a file system

I already covered and explained that. The minimum non-compressed size (i.e. no space lost to headers and disk format) for monochrome 8x8 images is 147,573,952,590 GB. Even if it's compressed down to 1% of it's original size, it would still be 1,475,739,526 GB.

there's no point in generating and storing each possible image.

We could study the time domain, which maks this venture equally unfeasable.

Comment on Re^8: Very Large Hex Combinations

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: Very Large Hex Combinations by Anonymous Monk on Aug 05, 2005 at 14:31 UTC
Even if it's compressed down to 1% of it's original size, it would sitl lbe 184,467 TB. You are basically storing every 64 bit pattern - each pattern once, and only once. Unless you compress the entire collection (and then you can compress that with an almost 100% factor - just compress it to your generating program), you're not going to compress it.	[reply]
Re^10: Very Large Hex Combinations by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 05, 2005 at 14:34 UTC
I think you misread my post. Compressing down to 1% is 99% compression, which is almost 100%. I doubt you'll get that good compression, even if the whole collection is zipped as one file.	[reply]
Re^11: Very Large Hex Combinations by Anonymous Monk on Aug 05, 2005 at 15:05 UTC
I know what you meant. I know compression to 1% is 99% compression. My point is that if you want to compress each file, you will not get a positive compression factor, as there are 2^64 files, each of 64bits, and all different. You can't be more space efficient. OTOH, compressing the entire collection is easy - all you need is the generating program as your decompression algorithm. So instead of compressing it down to 184,467 TB, you compress it down to a few kb. Which is almost 100%.	[reply]