I am an Engineer on Bob Schmid’s team and I ran through a couple of scenarios to compare disk usage between SMAT files and SMATdb.
1. I took a SMATdb and ran hcismatconvert to create .msg, .idx and .ecd files. The SMATdb size is 206,908,416 bytes and the combined size of the resulting .msg, .idx and .ecd files is 206,158,596 bytes (uncompressed)
2. I loaded flat SMAT files into the SMAT tool, where the combined .msg, .idx and .ecd file size is 15,713,925 bytes. I resent all messages to an outbound thread with protocol:file dev/null and SMATdb enabled (no encryption). The resulting SMATdb on the outbound thread is 10,676,259 bytes.
Does it seem reasonable that the SMATdb would be about the same size or even smaller than uncompressed flat SMAT files?
Thanks,
Todd
