The cover algorithm selects one segment per epoch, and it selects the epoch
size such that `epochs * segmentSize ~= dictSize`. Selecting less epochs
gives the algorithm more candidates to choose from for each segment it
selects, and then it will loop back to the first epoch when it hits the
last one.
The trade off is that now it takes longer to select each segment, since it
has to look at more data before making a choice.
I benchmarked on the following data sets using this command:
```sh
$ZSTD -T0 -3 --train-cover=d=8,steps=256 $DIR -r -o dict && $ZSTD -3 -D dict -rc $DIR | wc -c
```
| Data set | k (approx) | Before | After | % difference |
|--------------|------------|----------|----------|--------------|
| GitHub | ~1000 | 738138 | 746610 | +1.14% |
| hg-changelog | ~90 | 4295156 | 4285336 | -0.23% |
| hg-commands | ~500 | 1095580 | 1079814 | -1.44% |
| hg-manifest | ~400 | 16559892 | 16504346 | -0.34% |
There is some noise in the measurements, since small changes to `k` can
have large differences, which is why I'm using `steps=256`, to try to
minimize the noise. However, the GitHub data set still has some noise.
If I run the GitHub data set on my Mac, which presumably lists directory
entries in a different order, so the dictionary builder sees the files in
a different order, or I use `steps=1024` I see these results.
| Run | Before | After | % difference |
|------------|--------|--------|--------------|
| steps=1024 | 738138 | 734470 | -0.50% |
| MacBook | 738451 | 737132 | -0.18% |
Question: Should we expose this as a parameter? I don't think it is
necessary. Someone might want to turn it up to exchange a much longer
dictionary building time in exchange for a slightly better dictionary.
I tested `2`, `4`, and `16`, and `4` got most of the benefit of `16`
with a faster running time.
ZSTD_decompress() can decompress multiple frames sent as a single input.
But the input size must be the exact sum of all compressed frames, no more.
In the case of a mistake on srcSize, being larger than required,
ZSTD_decompress() will try to decompress a new frame after current one, and fail.
As a consequence, it will issue an error code, ERROR(prefix_unknown).
While the error is technically correct
(the decoder could not recognise the header of _next_ frame),
it's confusing, as users will believe that the first header of the first frame is wrong,
which is not the case (it's correct).
It makes it more difficult to understand that the error is in the source size, which is too large.
This patch changes the error code provided in such a scenario.
If (at least) a first frame was successfully decoded,
and then following bytes are garbage values,
the decoder assumes the provided input size is wrong (too large),
and issue the error code ERROR(srcSize_wrong).
distance between levels is slightly increased
to compensate for level 1 speed improvements
and the will to have stronger level 19
extending the range of speed to cover.
for FSE symbols.
While it seems to work, the gains are negligible compared to rough maxNbBits evaluation.
There are even a few losses sometimes, that still need to be explained.
Furthermode, there are still cases where btlazy2 does a better job than btopt,
which seems rather strange too.
for proper estimation of symbol's weights
when using dictionary compression.
Note : using only huffman costs is not good enough,
presumably because sequence symbol costs are incorrect.
Make sure that $(INCLUDEDIR) exists before copying the headers there.
Otherwise, the contest of header files is copied over
$(DESTDIR)$(INCLUDEDIR), making it a regular file.
While at it, remove $(DESTDIR)$(INCLUDEDIR) from the list of directories
to create in the install-pc target. The install-pc target does not need
this directory.
reported by @let-def.
It's actually a bug in ZSTD_compressBegin_usingCDict()
which would pass a wrong pledgedSrcSize value (0 instead of ZSTD_CONTENTSIZE_UNKNOWN)
resulting in wrong window size, resulting in downsized seqStore,
resulting in segfault when writing into the seqStore later in the process.
Added a test in fuzzer to cover this use case (fails before the patch).
Whilst working on the Reproducible Builds effort [0], we noticed
that zstd could not be built reproducibly.
This is due to the manual page encoding the number of CPUs from the
build machine and thus varies across builds.
This was originally filed in Debian as #897904 [1].
[0] https://reproducible-builds.org/
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/897904
Signed-off-by: Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org>
