From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 28 22:18:29 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2EA5106564A for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 22:18:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from smtp.timeweb.ru (smtp.timeweb.ru [92.53.116.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 703778FC1A for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 22:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [213.148.20.85] (helo=hive.panopticon) by smtp.timeweb.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SZ8Gg-00066q-2j; Tue, 29 May 2012 02:18:26 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.32]) by hive.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5EB5B84D; Tue, 29 May 2012 02:18:25 +0400 (MSK) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CD98ABB3; Tue, 29 May 2012 02:18:25 +0400 (MSK) Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 02:18:25 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Peter Jeremy Message-ID: <20120528221825.GB38860@hades.panopticon> References: <20120527140541.GL2987@hades.panopticon> <20120528094427.GE2675@aspire.rulingia.com> <20120528195542.GB85856@hades.panopticon> <20120528200403.GB15356@server.rulingia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120528200403.GB15356@server.rulingia.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc completeness X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 22:18:29 -0000 * Peter Jeremy (peter@rulingia.com) wrote: > >> >2) Is this ok to backport the list from current to stable branches?= Pro > >> >- it's really simple, con - it will contain files never installed w= ith > >> >this (old) branch. > >>=20 > >> Another con: "make delete-old" on -current takes about 2 orders of > >> magnitude longer to run than on 8.x. I would prefer to see some > >> effort put into speeding it up before it was backported. > > > >Is that really a reason while it is still under 4 seconds and is not > >usually run more often than updates (which take minutes if not hours)? >=20 > My experience is that it now takes about 2=C2=BD minutes on 10.x with w= arm > caches, compared to less than 1 second on 8.x. Now =3D after applying my patch or after changing system? Which knobs were enabled? OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc is 3x larger after the patch - it's expected for things to become 3x slower, but definitely not 250x. > For most of that time, there's no output and there's no warning > of the increased time. I actually wrote about the poor performance > here a couple of weeks ago. Then you should try to profile it - my script basically runs delete-old delete-old-libs for every knob (131 of them), and it hadn't taken more than 4 seconds even once. --=20 Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://www.amdmi3.ru