*BSD News Article 64605


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!yama.mcc.ac.uk!news.salford.ac.uk!aber!not-for-mail
From: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: Sometimes you need X server source (Was: Why to not buy Matrox Millennium)
Date: 31 Mar 1996 23:47:11 +0100
Organization: Prifysgol Cymru, Aberystwyth
Lines: 29
Sender: pcg@osfb.aber.ac.uk
Message-ID: <vwjd95s6ftc.fsf@osfb.aber.ac.uk>
References: <4j21ph$crr@slappy.cs.utexas.edu>
	<4j36ev$prl@news.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
	<4ja099$r8k@ceylon.gte.com>
	<ragnaroek1996Mar28.063723.8733@news2.compulink.com>
Reply-To: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi)
NNTP-Posting-Host: osfb.aber.ac.uk
In-reply-to: jwalters@idirect.com's message of 28 Mar 96 11:37:23 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0.15
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.apps:13849 comp.os.linux.development.system:20279 comp.os.linux.hardware:34820 comp.os.linux.setup:47957 comp.os.linux.x:28004 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:365 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2869 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:16272 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:2647

>>> On 28 Mar 96 11:37:23 GMT, jwalters@idirect.com (Jonathan Walters)
>>> said:

jwalters> On 26 Mar 1996 23:57:28 GMT, mbr@poitin.gte.com (Mark
jwalters> Rosenthal) wrote:

mbr> I sometimes run my X connection over a modem, and it's slower than
mbr> I'd like.  What does this have to do with whether or not to buy a
mbr> Matrox Millennium card?  Someday soon, I plan on rebuilding my X
mbr> server to include the LBX (low bandwidth X) extension.

jwalters> Is it a figment of my imagination or do most modems already
jwalters> compress any data being transfered.  That would make LBX a
jwalters> waste of time.

No, because modems only compress data; what you want to do with the X11
protocol is to compress the procotol itself, because it is highly
redundant not in data but _structurally_.

The reason is that each X11 packet is some dozen bytes long because it
contains a lot of large header fields that contain almost the same
information packet after packet, and often the data they carry is very
little (for example when you type a key, it may happen that the packet
contains several dozen bytes of headers and carries a single byte of
data).

The headers don't compress very well _as generic data_, but can compress
rather better if a specific strategy (typically a variation on turning
the X protocol from datagram to VC based) is used.