You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Using a 7314288 byte (~7MB) json file as an example:
The image is kinda blown out, so here's the raw data:
Quality
Compression Time
Size
0
0.011061668
287292
1
0.009209156
213457
2
0.018366814
184692
3
0.01734972
184569
4
0.023967743
177295
5
0.037658453
151161
6
0.042690992
150042
7
0.054255962
148143
8
0.072593212
147667
9
0.108716726
146448
10
1.435314894
130876
11
20.70757484
122797
I understand the desire to have the library put its highest compression quality out there first, but wouldn't it create an overall better impression on users if a faster default was used? Quality 8 provides nearly as good a result as 11, but it's almost 300 times faster.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Using a 7314288 byte (~7MB) json file as an example:
The image is kinda blown out, so here's the raw data:
I understand the desire to have the library put its highest compression quality out there first, but wouldn't it create an overall better impression on users if a faster default was used? Quality 8 provides nearly as good a result as 11, but it's almost 300 times faster.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: