** Quoting Denis Boyles to All:
DB> Does anybody have any suggestion, or guidlines to what huffman
  > buffer size is good for what data? I've been using the following:
DB> -JH16384
  > -JH65535
DB> Depending on the files, one way is usually better than the other.
  > Though I'm wondering what is best for what. Also, might other sizes
  > be better for certain data types than other sizes. ie. text files,
  > binary files, etc.
Robert once said the following on this subject:
================================ Begin =================================
   Date: 09-13-93  11:24p
   From: Robert Jung
     To: Douglas Montgomery
Subject: Huffman buffer & text fil
************************************************************************
In a message of , Douglas Montgomery (1:261/1098) writes:
 DM>     I have noticed a referral to the jh or jt switch that selects
 DM> the size of the huffman buffer.  Also I believe in your docs
 DM> somewhere you state that the -jh or -jt option increases text file
 DM> compression?.  If you use that option (-jt or -jh) and increase it
 DM> to the maximium effective limit?(which is what?), could you include
 DM> it on your command
The test for text and binary is not effective enough to
control the Huffman buffer size.  That size is very
dependent upon the variability of the data.  The more
variable, the smaller the Huffman buffer should be.
Robert
--- msged 2.07
---------------