CDP Copy Smaller?

I noticed that a CDP copy of a route is smaller than the original.
About 60% less for a route.
Is it safe to assume that this is due to efficient packing?

Compression.

.cdp files are very similar to the ZIP compressed archive files. As is always the case, compression techniques have their limits. ZIP compression, for example, does not perform well on files that are already highly compressed, such as JPEGs and other image compression methods.

This means that the compression ratio can vary enormously depending on the nature of the assets in a route/session that are being placed into a .cdp file.

I have never understood some of the third-party downloads that are a .cdp file inside of a zip or 7z file inside of another zip or 7z file. Seems a bit of overkill.

Forester1 said:

Seems a bit of overkill.

Click to expand...

For a single .cdp definitely overkill. I just tested the "concept" with a 43MB .cdp file. "Compressed" into a Zip it saved an enormous 584 bytes of space - that was a size reduction of 0.013%.

The only practical application that I could think of is when you are bundling several .cdp files into the one Zip or 7z file, something that Content Manager can do with .cdps anyway. I suppose it might be easier than opening CM, locating all the relevant assets and then exporting them into a single .cdp.

My theories anyway.

The main reason for putting a cdp in a zip for a third-party website download is that web hosts often restrict what file types you are allowed to use and cdp is rarely on that list whereas zip usually is