Jnuw
21st October 2005 18:46 UTC

LZMA ... Solid vs. Not Solid
Hello all.

Just looking from some information on the differences between LZMA Solid vs. not Solid. I have an installer that I'm sending out containing ~250 files. Non Solid gives me an EXE of 2416 KB, where Solid gives me 1588 KB. Whats the draw back on Solid? Thanks all.

Jnuw

kichik
21st October 2005 21:21 UTC

With solid compression, files are uncompressed to temporary file before they are copied to their final destination. With large installers, this might be a problem when it comes to required hard disk space. But for 3MB, like yours, there's no reason not to use solid compression.

Jnuw
21st October 2005 21:26 UTC

Thanks kichik. I tried wrapping up a very large installer a while back, where with solid compression one of my co-workers noticed the installer or their computer locked up. When I gave them the larger non-solid exe, it worked fine for them. The source files for that update included over 1200 files and was over 320 MB in size.

Basically, my question is this, is there a certain size at which going from solid to non-solid is advisable to avoid any HD space or PC lock-up problems? I know its a tough question, but any insight you could provide would be wonderful, thanks much.

Jnuw

kichik
21st October 2005 21:35 UTC

I'd say it depends on your target audience and distribution media. If it's a local network, use fast zlib non-solid compression. If it's for heavy users who like to get the latest on everything, use lzma solid compression, even for very large installers. If it's distributed on a CD-ROM and fits without solid compression, don't use solid compression. etc.

Jnuw
21st October 2005 21:37 UTC

Sounds good, thanks for the explanation! :up: