# So I used KGB Archiver to compress a 10gb file into a 40mb file...



## KneeSlappington (Apr 8, 2015)

...and now I'm trying to decompress it.

80 hours? I can stand that, I'll just leave the computer running overnight.

My worst fear is that with this kind of extreme data compression I would get corrupted pictures / videos when I decompress everything....

Will that happen? Because several pictures haven't yet loaded and the archiver has moved onto the videos, which none loads. Are they all corrupted?


----------



## Ahhzz (Apr 8, 2015)

I can't think of any possible way that 10Gb of data could be reliably compressed down to 40mb... you'll have to let us know....


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 8, 2015)

same here reported it as a junk post


----------



## Maban (Apr 8, 2015)

There's no way to compress 10GB of anything to 40MB. I hope you still have the original files because they aren't in the archive.

In response to @xorbe's post below:


Spoiler


----------



## KneeSlappington (Apr 8, 2015)

dorsetknob said:


> same here reported it as a junk post


It's not a junk post! I'm serious!

9.77 gb to 48mb. I already regret it.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 8, 2015)

As @Maban  says


Maban said:


> There's no way to compress 10GB of anything to 40MB. I hope you still have the original files because they aren't in the archive.



I doubt that there is any known archive program that could compress 10gig down to 40 mb hence the reason i called it a junk post

whats the name of this wondrous KGB Program


----------



## Tatty_One (Apr 8, 2015)

Running overnight to decompress?  Maybe over 3 nights and 4 days yes but I too don't forsee a useable 10GB at the end of your energy bill, I genuinely would like to know if I am wrong though because apart from an 80 hour decompress that would really be something .


----------



## KneeSlappington (Apr 8, 2015)

dorsetknob said:


> As @Maban  says
> 
> 
> I doubt that there is any known archive program that could compress 10gig down to 48 mb hence the reason i called it a junk post
> ...


KGB Archiver.


----------



## xorbe (Apr 8, 2015)

80 hours?  Are your internet lights dasblinken?  Maybe it sent all your data to the cloud for "inspection".

The real KGB Archiver seems legit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB_Archiver

Use 7-Zip next time.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 8, 2015)

wilki is informitive

Development status Discontinued
The official website is now offline.


----------



## Mindweaver (Apr 8, 2015)

Yea, I have to agree that it's not possible. If your pictures are jpg's then you have to realize that jpg's are a compressed file. Can it still be compressed? Yes, but it's not going to be by much. I'm afraid you have lost your files unless you have your original files.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 20, 2015)

Well, if the data is highly repetitive, you can. You'll essentially create a decompression bomb, but yeah. If you make a file with 100.000 zeros in it, you'll be able to get insane compression ratios.

But every compressor has its limits even if it's even so much advanced. You can only deconstruct and re-organize data to a certain point. While it is a calculation and memory restriction, it also depends on the algorithm. I'm not aware of any algorithm in existence that would take all that ou the window and deliver an insane compression even if it took a whole month to compress something. But I haven't even heard of anything like that.


----------



## qubit (Apr 20, 2015)

It could work if the file being compressed was a virtually blank one, even if it was something like a BMP of 100000 x 100000 or something. However, that's not the case, so this sounds rather suspect.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 20, 2015)

KneeSlappington said:


> ...and now I'm trying to decompress it.
> 
> 80 hours? I can stand that, I'll just leave the computer running overnight.
> 
> ...



well over 300 hours gone by
Any up date @KneeSlappington


----------



## Ahhzz (Apr 20, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Well, if the data is highly repetitive, you can. You'll essentially create a decompression bomb, but yeah. If you make a file with 100.000 zeros in it, you'll be able to get insane compression ratios.
> 
> But every compressor has its limits even if it's even so much advanced. You can only deconstruct and re-organize data to a certain point. While it is a calculation and memory restriction, it also depends on the algorithm. I'm not aware of any algorithm in existence that would take all that ou the window and deliver an insane compression even if it took a whole month to compress something. But I haven't even heard of anything like that.


Exactly. Most compression programs change a series of 1s and/or 0s to a couple of digits, and stores the total file in a table of contents/index. If you've got a file with TONS of repeating digits, sure, but pictures? No way to get that kind of compression in the real world.


from an article on "How To Geek"
_
First, we installed Bastion and compressed its folder — about 863 MB in size of music, graphics, executable files, and various different types of documents:
_

_Zip (Windows 8.1): 746 MB (86.4% of the original size)_
_Zip (WinZip): 745 MB (86.3% of the original size)_
_RAR (WinRAR): 746 MB (86.4% of the original size)_
_7z (7-Zip): 734 MB (85% of the original size)_
_Next, we compressed Hotline Miami, which is 654 MB of data:
_

_Zip (Windows 8.1): 316 MB (48.3% of the original size)_
_Zip (WinZip): 314 MB (48% of the original size)_
_RAR (WinRAR): 307 MB (46.9% of the original size)_
_7z (7-Zip): 301 MB (46% of the original size)_

I would not expect a great deal of change from those numbers in November of 2014 to now, nor would I expect any real-world files to come any where NEAR the compression rate of .4%.


----------



## v12dock (Apr 20, 2015)

You can compress SQL quite a bit


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Apr 20, 2015)

dorsetknob said:


> well over 300 hours gone by
> Any up date @KneeSlappington


probably in the middle of a "shit my data got deleted how can i get it back" thread


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 20, 2015)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> probably in the middle of a "shit my data got deleted how can i get it back" thread



the image i got in my mind is


----------



## Octopuss (Apr 20, 2015)

Sounds like a semi trolling thread to me.
Why would anyone register an account and post THIS right away?


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 20, 2015)

Octopuss said:


> Sounds like a semi trolling thread to me.
> Why would anyone register an account and post THIS right away?



See post 3  and consider that there have been no reply's  since the day of original post ( 8 April ).


----------



## natr0n (Apr 20, 2015)

This is a travesty; I don't know what else to say.

I'm sure somewhere winrar and 7zip are crying.


----------



## RejZoR (Apr 20, 2015)

I prefer 7z with LZMA2 algorithm. It's rocket fast on my quadcore using 8 threads and with massive dictionary since I have 18 GB of RAM so I can be a bit crazy with it. Plus it provides pretty much the highest compression ratio at that speed. There are others that take whole night and you save up to 10MB. Frankly not worth it. But with speed and compression, 7z with LZMA2 is certainly a very viable option.


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 21, 2015)

KGB does what it says on the tin and yes its possible to get the ratio the op has
the downside is it will take a week to decompress it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAQ


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 21, 2015)

0.4% is unbelievable.  Just plain text with PAQ gets down to 13%.  Images have some native compression/lossy which means they're not very receptive to further packing.  I doubt all of the data is there.



Ahhzz said:


> _First, we installed Bastion and compressed its folder — about 863 MB in size of music, graphics, executable files, and various different types of documents:_
> 
> _Zip (Windows 8.1): 746 MB (86.4% of the original size)_
> _Zip (WinZip): 745 MB (86.3% of the original size)_
> ...


Windows 8.1 and WinZip are both pkzip.  WinRAR uses LZSS + PPM. 7z uses modified LZ77 (from which LZSS is based on) and bzip2 + PPM.  That's kind of a moot test because all use various zip-derived algorithms.  PAQ is an entirely different animal.


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 21, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> 0.4% is pretty unbelievable.  Just plain text, which is what PAQ is designed for, gets down to 13%.  Images have some native compression/lossy which means they're not very receptive to further packing.  I doubt all of the data is there.
> 
> 10000 / 40 = 100 / x
> 10000x = 4000
> ...


I played with KGB back in the day I compressed my quake collection from 5.2GB down to 380MB
it literally took a week to decompress tho ...
PAQ* Is lossess assuming nothing went wrong during the compression all the data should be there


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 21, 2015)

That's 7.3%...a far cry from 0.4%.

By "quake collection," I assume you mean maps.  BSP is comprised hugely of 0s which means its very receptive to compression.


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 21, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> That's 7.3%...a far cry from 0.4%.
> 
> By "quake collection," I assume you mean maps.  BSP is comprised hugely of 0s which means its very receptive to compression.


no by collection of all 3 quake games + at least 3GB worth of textures and replacement assets


----------



## xorbe (Apr 21, 2015)

A week to decompress ... must have taken 2 months to compress!


----------

