ZPAQ support: open source incremental, journaling archiver

[Horst.Epp]

Well, the -method 5 is not recommended for common use, mainly because of it's slowness and memory requirements for larger files.
I'd stick with level 2 for general purpose compression.

Tests with some small files show that 7-zip compresses better than zpaq with level 5.
So my personal conclusion, its not of any value as a TC packer.

Look, I'd normally understand your points, but no need to draw false conclusions and spoil the program:

a 5 MiB (5.248.880) ROM file:
7-Zip maximum: 2.382.640
7PAQ: 2.019.282

Opera 12.17 x64 DLL file (21.252.448):
7-Zip maximum: 6.686.837
7PAQ: 5.918.963

INTEL386 DX datasheet (1.767.250):
7-Zip maximum: 1.315.409
7PAQ: 1.253.883

Tested again, this time with Level 2 and less amount of files.
About 3200 files (a mix of html jpg and png).
Btw. my machine has 16GB RAM and a Intel Core i7-4770.
The zpaq result was the same size as the 7-zip archive !
I tested with other smaller sets of other files but the zpaq archive where never smaller than the 7-zip archive.
I also tested this sets with WinRAR which was also better than zpqa.
It doesn't help if zpaq compresses one large single file better than others.
I always have to backup a whole tree of files and a mixture of formats.
The only good zpqa feature for me is the versioning.
[Edit] I also found that zpqa doesnt correctly save file names with German Umlaut like äöü

[Axis]

I'd stick with level 2 for general purpose compression.

zpaq -m4 seems a good tradeoff beteewn speed and compression ratio:

http://i.imgur.com/ODU74y1.png

[nsp]

Using Multiarc I tested it with about 1 GB in 800 files
which are compressed by Total7zip in a few minutes.

ZPAQ just hangs and must be terminated by the Taskmanager in this case.

Tests with some small files show that 7-zip compresses better than zpaq with level 5.
So my personal conclusion, its not of any value as a TC packer.

You can use zpaq to do backup every day some folder keeping track of the history. (you can also do it with software distributions/updates). The main advantage of ZPAQ is the ability to save/compress multiple version and keep track of all in one archive. Like if you used git inside a single file.. So do cot see it like a simple packer !
The value of it as a TC-Packer is that some of us use it. I must admit that it cannot be considered as packer for general purpose !

I do not use multiarc for packing with zpaq (i do it with batch) If you want to use it like a "packer", you do not get any advantage of the journaling/incremental capabilities. Keep also in mind that compression methods above 4 are quite slow and need very large amount of memory and only the 64bit version should be used in this cases.

[Horst.Epp]

Using Multiarc I tested it with about 1 GB in 800 files
which are compressed by Total7zip in a few minutes.

ZPAQ just hangs and must be terminated by the Taskmanager in this case.

Tests with some small files show that 7-zip compresses better than zpaq with level 5.
So my personal conclusion, its not of any value as a TC packer.

You can use zpaq to do backup every day some folder keeping track of the history. (you can also do it with software distributions/updates). The main advantage of ZPAQ is the ability to save/compress multiple version and keep track of all in one archive. Like if you used git inside a single file.. So do cot see it like a simple packer !
The value of it as a TC-Packer is that some of us use it. I must admit that it cannot be considered as packer for general purpose !

I do not use multiarc for packing with zpaq (i do it with batch) If you want to use it like a "packer", you do not get any advantage of the journaling/incremental capabilities. Keep also in mind that compression methods above 4 are quite slow and need very large amount of memory and only the 64bit version should be used in this cases.

2nsp
look in my last posting above yours
I said:
The only good zpqa feature for me is the versioning.
I also found that zpqa doesnt correctly save file names with German Umlaut like äöü

How does one solve the special characters problem in a batch file for backup purposes ?

For backups of all sort I normaly use Macrium Reflect

[Axis]

If you go with multiarc, and maimly want to use "viewing" and do not need "version" you can use/adapt my settings:

Btw, does It work with zpaq's aes encryption?

thanks

[nsp]

If you go with multiarc, and maimly want to use "viewing" and do not need "version" you can use/adapt my settings:

Btw, does It work with zpaq's aes encryption?

thanks

See in multiarc thread how to handle parameters and specially password. (-key)
You can give a look to MVV askparam and conpaste on TC Threads or on totalcmd.net.