lzbench

Pros of zstd

• Highly optimized compression algorithm with excellent speed/compression ratio
• Extensive documentation and active development by Facebook
• Supports dictionary compression for improved efficiency on small files

Cons of zstd

• Focused solely on zstd compression, not a benchmarking tool
• Less flexibility in comparing multiple compression algorithms
• Steeper learning curve for users unfamiliar with zstd specifics

Code comparison

zstd:

size_t ZSTD_compress(void* dst, size_t dstCapacity,
                     const void* src, size_t srcSize,
                     int compressionLevel);

lzbench:

int64_t lzbench_compress(char *inbuf, size_t insize,
                         char *outbuf, size_t outsize,
                         size_t level, const char *params,
                         char *workmem);

Key differences

• lzbench is a benchmarking tool for multiple compression algorithms, including zstd
• zstd focuses on providing a high-performance compression algorithm
• lzbench offers a unified interface for various compression methods, while zstd has a specialized API
• zstd provides more advanced features like dictionary compression and streaming API
• lzbench is better suited for comparing different algorithms, while zstd excels in production use cases

Pros of lz4

• Focused on a single, highly optimized compression algorithm (LZ4)
• Extensive documentation and API references
• Widely adopted and integrated into many popular projects

Cons of lz4

• Limited to LZ4 compression only
• Less flexibility for comparing different compression algorithms

Code comparison

lz4:

#define LZ4_COMPRESSBOUND(isize)   ((unsigned)(isize) > (unsigned)LZ4_MAX_INPUT_SIZE ? 0 : (isize) + ((isize)/255) + 16)

lzbench:

#define LZBENCH_COMPRESSOR(NAME, LEVEL) \
    {NAME, LEVEL, lzbench_ ## NAME ## _init, lzbench_ ## NAME ## _compress, lzbench_ ## NAME ## _decompress, lzbench_ ## NAME ## _deinit}

Key differences

lzbench is a benchmarking tool that supports multiple compression algorithms, including LZ4. It allows users to compare the performance of various compression methods. On the other hand, lz4 is dedicated to the LZ4 compression algorithm, providing a highly optimized implementation and extensive documentation for this specific method.

lzbench offers more flexibility for testing and comparing different compression algorithms, while lz4 focuses on providing the best possible implementation and support for the LZ4 algorithm. The choice between the two depends on whether you need to benchmark multiple algorithms or specifically work with LZ4 compression.

Pros of Snappy

• Highly optimized for speed, focusing on fast compression and decompression
• Developed and maintained by Google, ensuring reliability and ongoing support
• Widely adopted and integrated into many popular projects and databases

Cons of Snappy

• Limited compression ratio compared to other algorithms
• Primarily designed for specific use cases, may not be suitable for all scenarios
• Less flexibility in terms of compression levels and customization options

Code Comparison

Snappy

char* output = new char[snappy::MaxCompressedLength(input_length)];
size_t output_length;
snappy::RawCompress(input_data, input_length, output, &output_length);

LZBench

lzbench_compress_t compress = compressor_db[compressor_id].compress;
size_t compressed_size = compress(input_data, input_length, compressed_buf, compressed_buf_size);

Key Differences

• LZBench is a benchmarking tool for various compression algorithms, while Snappy is a specific compression algorithm
• LZBench allows for comparison of multiple algorithms, whereas Snappy focuses on its own implementation
• Snappy prioritizes speed over compression ratio, while LZBench enables testing of algorithms with different priorities

Use Cases

• Snappy: Ideal for scenarios requiring fast compression/decompression with moderate size reduction
• LZBench: Useful for developers and researchers comparing different compression algorithms' performance

Pros of xxHash

• Focused on fast non-cryptographic hash functions
• Provides multiple hash algorithms (XXH32, XXH64, XXH3)
• Extensive language support through official and community bindings

Cons of xxHash

• Limited to hash functions, not a comprehensive benchmarking tool
• Doesn't provide comparisons with other compression algorithms
• Less versatile for general-purpose compression testing

Code Comparison

xxHash (XXH64 function):

XXH_FORCE_INLINE XXH64_hash_t XXH64_round(XXH64_hash_t acc, XXH64_hash_t input)
{
    acc += input * PRIME64_2;
    acc  = XXH_rotl64(acc, 31);
    acc *= PRIME64_1;
    return acc;
}

lzbench (benchmarking function):

int64_t lzbench_compress(char *inbuf, size_t insize, char *outbuf, size_t outsize, size_t level, char* temp)
{
    return compressor(inbuf, insize, outbuf, outsize, level);
}

Summary

xxHash is a specialized library for fast non-cryptographic hash functions, while lzbench is a comprehensive benchmarking tool for various compression algorithms. xxHash offers high-performance hash functions with broad language support, but lacks the versatility and comparison capabilities of lzbench for general compression testing. The code examples highlight their different focuses: xxHash on efficient hashing and lzbench on benchmarking multiple compressors.