<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Benchmark Dump</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.elsdoerfer.name/2009/06/12/benchmark-dump/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.elsdoerfer.name/2009/06/12/benchmark-dump/</link>
	<description>Contributing back to the Google Index.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:02:07 +0200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tomaž Muraus</title>
		<link>http://blog.elsdoerfer.name/2009/06/12/benchmark-dump/comment-page-1/#comment-1137</link>
		<dc:creator>Tomaž Muraus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 23:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.elsdoerfer.name/?p=86#comment-1137</guid>
		<description>I know I&#039;m digging this up, but anyway...

I see you have used gzip (when compressing the files) which can&#039;t use multiple cores / CPUs, so it might be interesting to see how much faster it would run if you would use (for example) pigz.

pigz is basically a relatively young gzip replacement which can utilize multiple cores / CPUs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know I'm digging this up, but anyway...</p>
<p>I see you have used gzip (when compressing the files) which can't use multiple cores / CPUs, so it might be interesting to see how much faster it would run if you would use (for example) pigz.</p>
<p>pigz is basically a relatively young gzip replacement which can utilize multiple cores / CPUs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
