• Toribor@corndog.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’d argue with this, but it seems like image and video file extensions have become a lawless zone with no rules so I don’t even think they count.

        • fibojoly@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Back in the day, when bandwidth was precious and porn sites would parcel a video into 10 second extracts, one per page, you could zip a bunch of these mpeg files together into an uncompressed zip, then rename it .mpeg and read it in VLC as a single video. Amazing stuff.

  • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ah, good ol’ Microsoft Office. Taken advantage of their documents being a renamed .zip format to send forbidden attachments to myself via email lol

    On the flip side, there’s stuff like the Audacity app, that saves each audio project as an SQLite database 😳

    • mogoh@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      that saves each audio project as an SQLite database 😳

      Is this a problem? I thought this would be a normal use case for SQLite.

      • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        doesn’t sqlite explicitly encourage this? I recall claims about storing blobs in a sqlite db having better performance than trying to do your own file operations

        • MNByChoice@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Thanks for the hint. I had to look that up. (The linked page is worth a read and has lots of details and caveats.)

          The scope is narrow, and well documented. Be very wary of over generalizing.

          The measurements in this article were made during the week of 2017-06-05 using a version of SQLite in between 3.19.2 and 3.20.0. You may expect future versions of SQLite to perform even better.

          https://www.sqlite.org/fasterthanfs.html

          SQLite reads and writes small blobs (for example, thumbnail images) 35% faster¹ than the same blobs can be read from or written to individual files on disk using fread() or fwrite().

          Furthermore, a single SQLite database holding 10-kilobyte blobs uses about 20% less disk space than storing the blobs in individual files.)

          Edit 5: consolidated my edits.

        • Gamma@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Thought I’d check on the Linux source tree tar. zstd -19 vs lzma -9:

          ❯ ls -lh
          total 1,6G
          -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 1,4G Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar
          -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 128M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.lzma
          -rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 138M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.zst
          

          About +8% compared to lzma. Decompression time though:

          zstd -d -k -T0 *.zst  0,68s user 0,46s system 162% cpu 0,700 total
          lzma -d -k -T0 *.lzma  4,75s user 0,51s system 99% cpu 5,274 total
          

          Yeah, I’m going with zstd all the way.