From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 14 19:20:09 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31FFE16A401 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:20:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daffy@xview.net) Received: from mail.oav.net (mail.oav.net [193.218.105.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C8413C428 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:20:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daffy@xview.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail03.oav.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1732E33C22; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:53:56 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from daffy@xview.net) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mail03.oav.net Received: from mail03.oav.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.oav.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with LMTP id HhqtdEhViHAp; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:53:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (ble59-6-82-240-108-228.fbx.proxad.net [82.240.108.228]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail03.oav.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3080F33C20; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:53:55 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from daffy@xview.net) In-Reply-To: <346a80220702141036j29485688gf052be8f4432eed5@mail.gmail.com> References: <17875.18893.789217.224987@canoe.dclg.ca> <200702141255.53501.lists@jnielsen.net> <346a80220702141036j29485688gf052be8f4432eed5@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <33BBE265-A5B1-4F82-BF41-84825A7089FC@xview.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Olivier Warin Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:54:09 +0100 To: cokane@cokane.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, David Gilbert Subject: Re: portupgrade O(n^m)? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:20:09 -0000 daffy@katia:~ %> pkg_info | wc -l =20= -[19:49]- 917 Really portupgrade becomes clearly not so usable for me after I =20 switch to Xorg 7.2RC which install 300 more packages, my workstation =20 is a xSeries 226 with a Xeon 2,8Ghz 1Go DDR2. So I can imagine what =20 it does on a laptop... This issue is not only related to portupgrade, pkg_add a new port =20 takes far too long now... and make index each time I upgrade my ports =20= is awfull too. "Someone has to do something" (tm) Regards, Le 14 f=E9vr. 07 =E0 19:36, Coleman Kane a =E9crit : > On 2/14/07, John Nielsen wrote: >> >> On Wednesday 14 February 2007 12:41, David Gilbert wrote: >> > I have 734 ports installed on my laptop right now. I'm pretty =20 >> sure, >> > at times, I've had over 1000 ports on my laptop. >> > >> > On machine with moderate numbers of ports (most servers seem to =20 >> have >> > 50 to 200 ports), portupgrade takes a moderate amount of time to =20= >> start >> > work. On machines like my laptop, portupgrade seems to take =20 >> much more >> > time to run. I assume it's solving the dependency graph before it >> > decides what to upgrade first, but is this truly a O(n^2) =20 >> problem? It >> > seems like the implemented algorithm is O(n^2). >> >> Just a "me too". I noticed a huge increase in time for portupgrade =20= >> when I >> started using the modular Xorg ports tree and upgraded to X.org =20 >> 7.2RC. The >> number of installed ports on my machine went from just over 300 to =20= >> well >> over >> 600 as a result of the upgrade. Specifying small numbers of ports =20 >> (without >> globbing) to portupgrade doesn't seem to take much more time, >> but "portupgrade -a" or anything similar takes forever now. If =20 >> there is an >> optimization to be made there it would be good to do it before =20 >> modular >> xorg >> hits the official tree. >> >> JN > > > I've also had this problem. I have found that if I perform a =20 > "portsdb -U && > pkgdb -F" every time following a cvsup that portupgrade doesn't try =20= > to go > through the full ports indexing steps again. > > It is still slow, and any improvement that can be made should be. =20 > It is > already a significant enough pain that most ports build in a =20 > shorter amount > of time than it takes portupgrade to update its database. > > -- > Coleman Kane > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-=20 > unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Olivier Warin