• Browse Blogs
  • My Blog
  • My Updates

+Tags Get help with tags?

  • View as cloud  | list

+ Similar Entries

photo

Sametime Entry 8.5 C...

Blog:  AnythingAroun...
Maurice Teeuwe
Updated 
No RatingsRatings 0     No CommentsComments 0
photo

8.5.1 UNFAIL - Part ...

Blog:  Erik Brooks
Erik Brooks
Updated 
RatingsRatings 2     No CommentsComments 0
photo

8.5.1 UN-FAIL! The F...

Blog:  Erik Brooks
Erik Brooks
Updated 
No RatingsRatings 0     CommentsComments 6
photo

maintain your consol...

Blog:  AnythingAroun...
Maurice Teeuwe
Updated 
No RatingsRatings 0     No CommentsComments 0
photo

8.5.1 FAIL. Your cod...

Blog:  Erik Brooks
Erik Brooks
Updated 
RatingsRatings 6     CommentsComments 27

+ Blog Authors  

Compression - not for me...

Karl-Henry Martinsson |   | Tags:  domino compresssion 8.5 | Comments (3)  |  Visits (626)
It has been a while since I did some blogging, but I been recharging some this last weekend and I will try to get back into a somewhat regular schedule.

Before I start, I would like to point out a function I would love to see in Lotus Connections, where this blog runs. I don't think it is something only useful for Bleedyellow.com, but for all Connections users. The function? To allow anonymous (or at least non-validated/logged in) users to comment.
Could be a setting on a per-blog basis. I don't think it is unthinkable that a company get Lotus Connections and use it both for internal/closed blogging, and for some external blogs as well, where they want to allow feedback form the public.

OK, now on to other stuff. I been reading for a while about all the benefits of the compression in Domino 8.0.1 and 8.5, as well as DAOS. So of course, having several huge databases, I got very excited. The claim system I wrote is split over a couple of databases. The main one is currently 6,930 MB (including view indexes) with 1,4 million documents, and the biggest supporting one is 7,363 MB with almost 1,8 million documents (about 1400 new ones created each business day). The view indexes are fairly large, over a GB on the first database for example.

Our Domino administrator did some testing on a Domino 8.5 server he setup, but he did not see any space savings at all on the claim system. I believe that the database size even increased a few MB. He then turned on the new attachment compression, and got a 1.5% savings, or something to that effect.
He will soon try the same with his mailfile and see if he get a better result. When I get the final numbers, I will post them here.

So why are we not getting any 20-40% savings others report? Well, for one thing, the documents contain very little rich text data. Almost all fields are plain text fields, and the few rich text fields are used for comments and usually not populated with much data, if any. There are also not a large number of attachments. They are all stored outside Domino, using an FTP upload/download system I designed many years ago. In some of the main documents there is one attachment (usually a PDF of a loss report), but in many of them, the users also use the attachment functionality to put the attachment on the FTP server.

So if your database does not contain large rich text fields and attachments, it seems like the compression will not do much good. However, for mail files or other similar applications, the savings seems to be substantial.
No RatingsRatings 0

Comments (3)

photo
1 David Jones commented   Permalink No RatingsRatings 0

Yeah, I haven't seen large amounts of savings outside of mail files and I don't think I'll see those savings until I get DAOS enabled on the applications that have attachments stored inside the NSF.

photo
2 Chris Whisonant commented   Permalink RatingsRatings 1

Regarding the Connections suggestion. It is something that we have asked IBM about on many occasions - even going back to before we even went public with the BleedYellow site! So we agree with you wholeheartedly, but it's out of our hands. :(

Regarding your last paragraph, you'll also only see space savings when you have duplicate attachments either within the database or shared among many databases.

photo
3 Karl-Henry Martinsson commented   Permalink No RatingsRatings 0

@Chris: Yeah, I know it is not something you guys control. I think it is something IBM need to fix, though.

Add a Comment Add a Comment

Previous |  Main  | Next
Skip to main content link. Accesskey S
IBM Lotus Connections Help Tools About