- 浏览: 255003 次
- 性别:
- 来自: 大连
文章分类
最新评论
-
红小豆:
Criteria和Detachedcriteria的区别及应用 -
fjjiaboming:
那就稍微翻译一下 啊....
Mysql autoReconnect 的问题 -
woyaowenzi:
非常感谢,我正想做一个画线的控件,就和windows的画图板一 ...
一个简单的FLEX画图demo -
guzen:
可以用一下flash builder 4,现在支持绝对定位了, ...
how to use flex layouts -
suifeng:
好!
一个简单的FLEX画图demo
A Quick Benchmark: Gzip vs. Bzip2 vs. LZMA
- 博客分类:
- CentOS/RedHat
How the test files were selected
I was especially interested how well LZMA compression would fit in
- binary package management of GNU/*/Linux distributions
- distributing source code of free software
In both uses the files are compressed on one computer and decompressed many times by users around the world. In practice the most important factors are:
- compressed size (faster to download; more packages fit into one CD or DVD)
- time required in decompression (fast installation is nice)
- memory requirements for decompression (should the user want to use the file on e.g. an old i486 with 8 MB RAM)
- common format that everyone knows how to uncompress/install
Less important:
- time wasted for compressing in the package build process; compiling software usually takes several minutes or even hours so spending one or two minutes to compress the package tightly increases the build time only little.
- memory requirements for the compressing process; few people build packages on i486 or i586 class machines having 16 to 64 megs of RAM. However, no one wants to use a tool that needs hundreds of megabytes or even gigabytes of RAM to achieve good results.
Despite the many common factors, the contents of binary packages and source tarballs are quite different. Binary packages primarily contain executables and libraries while source tarballs contain mostly ASCII text of some programming language. Naturally both contain data files used by the program and (hopefully) some documentation.
Test conditions
Tests were run on a laptop:
- AMD mobile Athlon XP2400+
- 512 MB RAM
- Linux 2.6.12-rc4 (preempt, 4k stacks, regparm)
- gzip 1.3.3, bzip2 1.0.3, LZMA SDK 4.17
bzip2 has two compression modes, one for normal use and another designed for small memory footprint (which can be invoked with 'bzip2 --small'). Only the normal mode was tested because it's faster.
Times are from the output of the command 'time' (line 'user') and rounded. Because of this, the compression and decompression time and speed tables should be taken as suggestive and not as the absolute truth. In practice, the bigger test files should be more reliable in terms of speed comparison.
When reading the tables, it is important to keep in mind which settings are the default in each program:
- gzip -6 (best speed/filesize ratio)
- bzip -9 (best compression ratio)
- lzmash -7 (excellent compression ratio and reasonable memory requirements)
- lzmash -e (the extreme mode) is only for reference in case someone wants to see how it affects the compression ratio.
The tables of the test results
Note: The first column with numbers 1..9 indicates the compression setting passed to gzip, bzip2 and lzmash (e.g. "gzip -9").
Tarball made from a full installation of OpenOffice.org 1.1.4 for Linux
Uncompressed size: 212664320 bytes (203 MB)
Compressed file size in bytes gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 86322815 76147880 67456213 - 2 84858575 74320824 62085798 - 3 83561997 73467586 59547691 59278372 4 81312776 73044026 58245872 57964166 5 79798262 72762041 56694215 56411631 6 79179298 72540199 56182079 55859514 7 78995264 72512833 55535273 55269226 8 78816280 72314472 54678948 54405078 9 78768334 72223858 54068819 53769958 Compressed size / Uncompressed size * 100% gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 40,6% 35,8% 31,7% - 2 39,9% 34,9% 29,2% - 3 39,3% 34,5% 28,0% 27,9% 4 38,2% 34,3% 27,4% 27,3% 5 37,5% 34,2% 26,7% 26,5% 6 37,2% 34,1% 26,4% 26,3% 7 37,1% 34,1% 26,1% 26,0% 8 37,1% 34,0% 25,7% 25,6% 9 37,0% 34,0% 25,4% 25,3% Compression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 11.5s 1m 26s 0m 58s - 2 12.0s 1m 40s 2m 7s - 3 13.7s 1m 54s 4m 58s 7m 37s 4 15.1s 2m 5s 5m 26s 8m 2s 5 18.4s 2m 11s 6m 47s 11m 18s 6 24.5s 2m 18s 7m 30s 12m 4s 7 29.4s 2m 25s 8m 24s 12m 59s 8 45.5s 2m 32s 10m 59s 20m 17s 9 66.9s 2m 37s 12m 20s 21m 56s Decompression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 3.3s 16.5s 11.3s - 2 3.3s 24.2s 10.5s - 3 3.3s 29.2s 10.5s 10.4s 4 3.3s 32.1s 10.4s 10.3s 5 3.2s 34.2s 10.2s 10.2s 6 3.2s 35.4s 10.2s 10.1s 7 3.2s 36.5s 10.1s 10.0s 8 3.2s 37.5s 10.0s 9.9s 9 3.1s 38.2s 10.0s 9.9s Compression speed, MB/s of uncompressed data (1 MB = 1024 * 1024 bytes) gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 18 2.4 3.5 - 2 17 2.0 1.6 - 3 15 1.8 0.68 0.44 4 13 1.6 0.62 0.42 5 11 1.5 0.50 0.30 6 8.3 1.5 0.45 0.28 7 6.9 1.4 0.40 0.26 8 4.5 1.3 0.31 0.17 9 3.0 1.3 0.27 0.15 Decompression speed, MB/s of uncompressed data (1 MB = 1024 * 1024 bytes) gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 61 12 18 - 2 61 8.4 19 - 3 61 6.9 19 20 4 61 6.3 20 20 5 63 5.9 20 20 6 63 5.7 20 20 7 63 5.6 20 20 8 63 5.4 20 20 9 65 5.3 20 20
The Linux kernel 2.6.11.0 source tarball
Uncompressed size: 208250880 bytes (199 MB)
Compressed file size in bytes gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 57860603 43873922 43933138 - 2 55274813 41108704 38871392 - 3 53416918 39791569 34863499 34823465 4 49695438 39040694 33545762 33513509 5 47775348 38395197 32481024 32445716 6 47004031 37975094 31686173 31661947 7 46797152 37676593 30881464 30841602 8 46578138 37365408 30295730 30261027 9 46578138 37075679 29809336 29780803 Compressed size / Uncompressed size * 100% gzip bzip2 1 27,8% 21,1% 21,1% - 2 26,5% 19,7% 18,7% - 3 25,7% 19,1% 16,7% 16,7% 4 23,9% 18,7% 16,1% 16,1% 5 22,9% 18,4% 15,6% 15,6% 6 22,6% 18,2% 15,2% 15,2% 7 22,5% 18,1% 14,8% 14,8% 8 22,4% 17,9% 14,5% 14,5% 9 22,4% 17,8% 14,3% 14,3% Compression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 8.3s 1m 9s 0m 45s - 2 8.7s 1m 22s 1m 45s - 3 9.8s 1m 34s 5m 10s 8m 43s 4 11.1s 1m 45s 5m 43s 9m 41s 5 13.8s 1m 57s 7m 39s 14m 38s 6 17.8s 2m 2s 8m 23s 15m 32s 7 20.7s 2m 11s 9m 11s 16m 23s 8 29.7s 2m 21s 11m 34s 24m 47s 9 40.9s 2m 26s 12m 31s 25m 53s Decompression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 2.8s 12.8s 7.7s - 2 2.7s 19.4s 6.9s - 3 2.6s 23.8s 6.4s 6.6s 4 2.5s 26.4s 6.3s 6.3s 5 2.5s 28.3s 6.3s 6.3s 6 2.4s 29.6s 6.2s 6.3s 7 2.4s 30.6s 6.2s 6.2s 8 2.4s 31.3s 6.1s 6.1s 9 2.4s 32.1s 6.1s 6.1s Compression speed, MB/s of uncompressed data (1 MB = 1024 * 1024 bytes) gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 24 2.9 4.4 - 2 23 2.4 1.9 - 3 20 2.1 0.64 0.38 4 18 1.9 0.58 0.34 5 14 1.7 0.43 0.23 6 11 1.6 0.39 0.21 7 9.6 1.5 0.36 0.20 8 6.7 1.4 0.29 0.13 9 4.9 1.4 0.26 0.13 Decompression speed, MB/s of uncompressed data (1 MB = 1024 * 1024 bytes) gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 71 16 26 2 74 10 29 3 76 8.3 31 30 4 79 7.5 32 32 5 79 7.0 32 32 6 83 6.7 32 32 7 83 6.5 32 32 8 83 6.3 33 33 9 83 6.2 33 33
In this test bzip2 is a tough adversary to lzmash in fast modes. "lzmash -e" makes a few kB smaller files with the expense of a lot longer compression time.
XMMS 1.2.10 binary package
XMMS 1.2.10 binary package (xmms-1.2.10-i486-2.tgz) from Slackware 10.1. The file was first gunzipped, resulting uncompressed size of 5498880 bytes (5.2 MB).
Compressed file size in bytes gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 2160102 1803573 1431699 - 2 2112332 1611408 1140030 - 3 2072044 1539083 1034903 1038615 4 2031519 1487237 1004176 1007692 5 1992713 1464332 987189 988758 6 1979068 1433617 983305 983198 7 1973404 1431276 982125 983240 8 1972424 1414142 980836 983582 9 1970643 1385112 980836 983582 Compressed size / Uncompressed size * 100% gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 39,3% 32,8% 26,0% - 2 38,4% 29,3% 20,7% - 3 37,7% 28,0% 18,8% 18,9% 4 36,9% 27,0% 18,3% 18,3% 5 36,2% 26,6% 18,0% 18,0% 6 36,0% 26,1% 17,9% 17,9% 7 35,9% 26,0% 17,9% 17,9% 8 35,9% 25,7% 17,8% 17,9% 9 35,8% 25,2% 17,8% 17,9% Compression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 0.3s 2.4s 1.4s - 2 0.3s 2.9s 2.7s - 3 0.4s 3.2s 6.2s 8.9s 4 0.4s 3.3s 6.6s 9.3s 5 0.5s 4.6s 8.2s 13.3s 6 0.7s 5.6s 8.5s 13.7s 7 0.8s 4.7s 8.6s 13.6s 8 1.1s 4.9s 10.5s 21.5s 9 1.8s 5.1s 10.5s 21.5s Decompression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 0.1s 0.4s 0.3s - 2 0.1s 0.6s 0.2s - 3 0.1s 0.7s 0.2s 0.2s 4 0.1s 0.8s 0.2s 0.2s 5 0.1s 0.9s 0.2s 0.2s 6 0.1s 0.9s 0.2s 0.2s 7 0.1s 0.9s 0.2s 0.2s 8 0.1s 1.0s 0.2s 0.2s 9 0.1s 1.0s 0.2s 0.2s
For some reason, "bzip2 -6" took more time than even "bzip -9". The result didn't change when the test was repeated. The extreme mode of lzmash creates a few bytes bigger files; seems that using "lzmash -e" makes compression both slower and less efficient with smaller files. Speed tables are omitted because the smaller test file makes measuring the elapsed time with 'time' command too inaccurate.
XMMS 1.2.10 source tarball
Uncompressed size: 15964160 bytes (15.2 MB)
Compressed file size in bytes gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 4705710 3702465 3390291 - 2 4560441 3172615 2117511 - 3 4460478 2914692 1921894 1929077 4 4213705 2748562 1803104 1808532 5 4095300 2670185 1721301 1723689 6 4060060 2591439 1642013 1643645 7 4046707 2500735 1540827 1541735 8 4035433 2464688 1533283 1531514 9 4034855 2418265 1533283 1531514 Compressed size / Uncompressed size * 100% gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 29,5% 23,2% 21,2% - 2 28,6% 19,9% 13,3% - 3 27,9% 18,3% 12,0% 12,1% 4 26,4% 17,2% 11,3% 11,3% 5 25,7% 16,7% 10,8% 10,8% 6 25,4% 16,2% 10,3% 10,3% 7 25,3% 15,7% 9,7% 9,7% 8 25,3% 15,4% 9,6% 9,6% 9 25,3% 15,1% 9,6% 9,6% Compression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 0.7s 6.1s 3.5s - 2 0.7s 7.3s 6.0s - 3 0.8s 8.5s 19.0s 30.8s 4 0.9s 9.9s 19.9s 31.2s 5 1.1s 11.2s 28.9s 1m 1s 6 1.4s 11.0s 30.1s 1m 2s 7 1.7s 12.5s 30.9s 1m 4s 8 2.5s 15.9s 41.7s 1m 56s 9 2.9s 17.5s 41.7s 1m 56s Decompression time gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 0.2s 1.0s 0.6s - 2 0.2s 1.5s 0.4s - 3 0.2s 1.9s 0.4s 0.4s 4 0.2s 2.1s 0.4s 0.4s 5 0.2s 2.3s 0.4s 0.4s 6 0.2s 2.5s 0.4s 0.4s 7 0.2s 2.6s 0.4s 0.4s 8 0.2s 2.7s 0.4s 0.4s 9 0.2s 2.8s 0.4s 0.4s
For some reason, in compression "bzip2 -6" was a little faster than "bzip -5" but "bzip -6" still created smaller file. Speed tables are omitted because the smaller test file makes measuring the elapsed time with 'time' command too inaccurate.
Memory requirements
The memory requirements depend only on the used compression mode (-1 .. -9). bzip2 has also a mode that uses less memory but is slower. This small memory mode hasn't been tested.
RAM usage on compression gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 <1 MB 2 MB 2 MB - 2 <1 MB 2 MB 12 MB - 3 <1 MB 3 MB 12 MB 12 MB 4 <1 MB 4 MB 16 MB 16 MB 5 <1 MB 5 MB 26 MB 26 MB 6 <1 MB 5 MB 45 MB 45 MB 7 <1 MB 6 MB 83 MB 83 MB 8 <1 MB 7 MB 159 MB 159 MB 9 <1 MB 7 MB 311 MB 311 MB RAM usage on decompression gzip bzip2 lzmash lzmash -e 1 <1 MB 1 MB 1 MB - 2 <1 MB 2 MB 2 MB - 3 <1 MB 2 MB 1 MB 1 MB 4 <1 MB 2 MB 2 MB 2 MB 5 <1 MB 3 MB 3 MB 3 MB 6 <1 MB 3 MB 5 MB 5 MB 7 <1 MB 3 MB 9 MB 9 MB 8 <1 MB 4 MB 17 MB 17 MB 9 <1 MB 4 MB 33 MB 33 MB
Conclusions
Compression
When there's need for a very fast compression, gzip is the clear winner. It has also very small memory footprint, making it ideal for systems with limited memory.
bzip2 creates about 15% smaller files than gzip. bzip2 compresses somewhat slower than gzip, but seems that it hasn't prevented bzip2 from getting popular. Nowadays most source code is available as both gzip and bzip2 compressed tar archives.
"lzmash -3" and "lzmash -4" seem to be almost as fast (or slow); same can be said for "lzmash -5", "lzmash -6" and "lzmash -7". However the memory requirements increase with every option meaning that "lzmash -3", "lzmash -5" and "lzmash -6" are usually useful only if you (or the recipient) do not have enough memory for "lzmash -4" or "lzmash -7".
"lzmash -8" and "lzmash -9" require lots of memory and are practical only on newer computers; the files compressed with them are probably a pain to decompress on systems with less than 32 MB or 64 MB of memory.
The extreme mode ("lzmash -e") roughly doubles the compression time, but especially with small files can lead to even worse compression ratio than normal the mode. The extereme mode might be worth trying if you want make as small files as possible, but in that case forgetting lzmash wrapper script and playing with command line options of "lzma" directly can lead to better results.
Decompression
In terms of speed, gzip is the winner again. lzma comes right behind it two to three times slower than gzip. bzip2 is a lot slower taking usually two to six times more time than lzma, that is, four to twelve times more than gzip. One interesting thing is that gzip and lzma decompress the faster the smaller the compressed size is, while bzip2 gets slower when the compression ratio gets better.
The memory usage of lzma stays competitive with bzip2 when files have been compressed with "lzmash -6" or with a smaller option. The files compressed with the default "lzmash -7" can still be decompressed, even on machines with only 16 MB of RAM, but sometimes you don't have even that much memory available. If you compress with "lzmash -8" or "lzmash -9", you should think if the users need to be able to decompress your files also on "ancient" computers.
So what is the best?
Of course, it depends on the intended application. gzip is very fast and has small memory footprint. According to this benchmark, neither bzip2 nor lzma can compete with gzip in terms of speed or memory usage. bzip2 has notably better compression ratio than gzip, which has to be the reason for the popularity of bzip2; it is slower than gzip especially in decompression and uses more memory. However the memory requirements of bzip2 should be nowadays no problem even on older hardware.
Both gzip and bzip2 are bundled with practically all GNU/*/Linux distributions and *BSDs. Because everybody has the tools to handle gzip and bzip2 compressed files, they are by far the most commonly used formats to distribute e.g. source code of free software. However, the situation might change because better free (as in freedom) alternatives have become available.
LZMA clearly has potential to become the third commonly used general purporse compression format on *NIX systems. It mainly competes with bzip2 by offering significantly better compression ratio while still keeping decompressing speed relatively close to that of gzip. Its excellence has been already seen in Tukaani Linux package management system, and in software installers such as Nullsoft Scriptable Install System (NSIS), Inno setup and installers of MS-Windows versions of Mozilla products, including Firefox and Thunderbird.
发表评论
-
redhat as5.4 安装网站截图软件CutyCapt
2012-02-23 09:21 2080先安装Qt47 Java代码 收藏代码 增加qt4 ... -
linux中将前台进程转入后台的方法
2011-09-07 17:31 2764今天在网上偶然看到一个不错的建议。先更新一下: 以前在使用no ... -
Vnstat: 简单实用的网络流量统计工具
2011-05-18 22:02 1468http://www.linuxeden.com/html/s ... -
视频网站架构
2011-01-23 01:01 1582http://www.doorsolutions.cn/ 概述 ... -
how to install ffmpeg
2011-01-23 00:33 1540A little while back, I posted a ... -
CentOS安装MPlayer
2010-05-31 14:36 1505http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndT ... -
linux下tomcat启动80端口不能访问的问题
2009-06-15 21:18 7068service iptables save [code=&a ... -
Understanding memory usage on Linux
2009-06-12 10:50 1157This entry is for those people ... -
上传文件到linux时出现的乱码
2009-04-30 16:32 2124遇到见很郁闷的事。 维护一个很老的代码,编码都是gbk的,别 ... -
gdb 使用手册
2009-04-28 16:46 2094简述 一 列文件清单 二 ... -
OOM 机制
2009-03-26 21:40 1220When a system runs out of memor ... -
OOM killer "Out of Memory: Killed process SOLUTION
2009-03-26 21:39 1858Since this problem seems to pop ... -
linux 网络配置
2009-03-03 15:54 1151网络信息查看 查看网路接口信息 1.了解lin ... -
linux下删除文件出错
2009-01-12 16:27 2085今天忘记把程序停止, ... -
linux下自动备份mysql数据库
2009-01-12 16:22 1130新建文件: vi /home/bzhang/mysql_aut ... -
计划任务工具 cron 的配置和说明
2009-01-12 10:01 1105计划任务工具 cron 的配置和说明 作者: 北南南 ... -
用vsFTPd自架Linux网络安装服务器,以及Redhat局域网安装的解决办法
2009-01-05 12:06 1309ZZ FROM: http://www.linuxsir.or ... -
Clock in a Linux Guest Runs More Slowly or Quickly
2009-01-04 10:55 2073Clock in a Linux Guest R ... -
IPTABLE 学习
2008-12-30 15:40 959To be continued... -
VSFTP的时间错误
2008-12-30 10:31 843vsftp的配置问题 /etc/vsftpd/vsftpd.c ...
相关推荐
pointnet的数据集 shapenetcore_partanno_segmentation_benchmark_v0.zip; 有币的走投币,没币的链接:https://pan.baidu.com/s/1E_W1_nBTuVsQzk1HDJYZig 提取码:g6eo
Benchmark是用于GPU.js的简单基准测试工具。 该工具在JavaScript和CLI中均可使用。 该工具运行三个基准测试: 目录 与React Native一起使用 安装 注意:软件包gpu.js需要单独安装。 基准可在npm上以@gpujs/...
AS SSD Benchmark是一款专业的固态硬盘性能测试工具,由德国InnoDisk公司开发,主要用于评估SSD(固态硬盘)和HDD(机械硬盘)的读写速度、IOPS(每秒输入/输出操作次数)等关键性能指标。该工具1.6.4237.30508版本...
CIS_Aliyun_Linux_2_Benchmark_v1.0.0.pdf CIS_Amazon_Linux_2_Benchmark_v1.0.0.pdf CIS_Amazon_Linux_2_STIG_Benchmark_v1.0.0.pdf CIS_Amazon_Web_Services_Foundations_Benchmark_v1.2.0.pdf CIS_Amazon_Web_...
Benchmark.js插件 一些帮助文件可简化测试的编写。 用法 运行测试,演示,构建等主要可从Makefile中获得。 记者 ./src/benchmark-reporter.js 一个非常简单的报告器,将信息记录到history对象并打印信息到console ...
CIS_CentOS_Linux_7_Benchmark_v3.0.0.
固态硬盘基准测试(AS SSD Benchmark)2.0.6821.41776汉化版
《BenchmarkSQL 4.1.1:数据库性能测试利器》 BenchmarkSQL,作为一个开源的数据库基准测试工具,广泛应用于数据库性能评估与优化。版本4.1.1是其一个重要里程碑,为开发者和数据库管理员提供了全面的数据库性能...
CIS_Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_8_Benchmark_v1.0.1.pdf
core.matrix.benchmark 用于core.matrix实现的基准测试套件基本原理core.matrix支持多种实现。 此仓库包含一系列基准,可用于分析这些实现之间的性能差异。用法去做也可以看看:
A small hash benchmark written by go. Some test result 2018 15' MacBook Pro (i7-8750H) md5 用时: 2.173 s sha1 用时: 1.481 s sha224 用时: 3.851 s sha256 用时: 3.985 s sha384 用时: 2.606 s sha512 用时: ...
CIS_CentOS_Linux_7_Benchmark_v3.1.1.pdf文件是关于如何安全配置CentOS Linux 7系统的指南。这份文档由Center for Internet Security(CIS)发布,旨在为用户提供一套标准化的安全基准测试,以帮助管理员加强系统...
标题中的“hash-benchmark”指的是一个项目或工具,用于在Node.js环境中对比和评估不同的哈希库性能。哈希库通常包含各种哈希函数,它们能够将任意大小的数据转化为固定长度的唯一标识(哈希值),广泛应用于数据...
### CIS Kubernetes Benchmark v1.6.0:Kubernetes 安全合规检查 #### 概述 CIS(Center for Internet Security)Kubernetes基准是为Kubernetes集群的安全配置提供指导的一套标准,它由社区专家根据最佳实践制定而...
简单点说benchmarksql就是一个通过JDBC 测试OLTP 的TPC-C。 支持PostgreSQL/EnterpriseDB, DB2, Oracle, SQLSvr, MySQL,DM,Kingbase
Heterogeneous Network Representation Learning: A Unified Framework with Survey and Benchmark 由于现实世界中的对象及其交互通常是多模态和多类型的,因此异构网络被广泛用作传统同构网络(图)的更强大、更...
How to Benchmark Your Linux System.mp4How to Benchmark Your Linux System.mp4How to Benchmark Your Linux System.mp4
2. **MySQL盲注类型** - **基于布尔的SQL盲注**:通过构造包含逻辑判断的SQL语句,例如`IF`或`BETWEEN`,根据页面是否发生明显变化来判断条件的真假。 - **基于时间的SQL盲注**:利用`SLEEP()`或`BENCHMARK()`函数...
AS_SSD_Benchmark_v2.073.zip 是一个用于测试和评估固态硬盘(SSD)性能的软件工具的压缩包。这个工具的主要目的是帮助用户检查他们的硬盘是否已正确执行了4K对齐,这是一个对于SSD优化至关重要的设置。在深入探讨这...