Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 12:07:00 -0600 From: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> To: Andrew J Caines <A.J.Caines@halplant.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: INDEX-5 is deleted then reconstructed by "make index" Message-ID: <oprxtglyjt8ckrg5@smtp.central.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20031029155727.GD15764@hal9000.halplant.com> References: <20031029042715.57311.qmail@web60301.mail.yahoo.com> <oprxsiwvxn8ckrg5@smtp.central.cox.net> <20031029155727.GD15764@hal9000.halplant.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 10:57:27 -0500, Andrew J Caines <A.J.Caines@halplant.com> wrote: > Jeremy, > >> I don't think so, because you still have to wait for the databases to be >> rebuilt, before you can use portversion. > > But since you will typically be cvsup'ing, building, updating dbs and > such > during `off hours', ie. not sitting in front of the terminal waiting for > it to finish, the db rebuilds don't take any important time. The CVSup'ing doesn't take hours, only two minutes or less for me. So I do finish everything at once, I only walk off when the portupgrade are building the stuff. > I do it like this[1] > > I was surprised by your timing results: Why surpised? The portversion is a winner, but my point was total of time in the steps. Without rebuild databases, the pkg_version still will work and quickly rather than wait for a long time to get the database to be rebuilt. >> # time portversion -l "<" >> 3.127u 0.653s 0:08.02 47.0% 22+9776k 1003+0io 0pf+0w >> # time pkg_version -l \< >> 29.930u 11.442s 0:49.49 83.5% 327+540k 1093+0io 63pf+0w > > On my two FreeBSD boxes with up-to-date ports and built indices (portsdb > -Uu; pkgdb -u), I get quite the opposite results: > > PII-266, 384MB, ports on old 4.5GB UW SCSI disk, 4.9-RC[2]: > > # time portversion -l "<" > real 0m15.162s, user 0m6.556s, sys 0m1.407s > # ttime pkg_version -l \< > real 2m24.996s, user 1m45.382s, sys 0m28.736s > > P4-1700, 384MB, ports on newish 20GB ATA-5 disk, 5.1p10[3]: > > # time portversion -l "<" > real 0m5.528s, user 0m1.027s, sys 0m0.407s > # time pkg_version -l \< > real 0m23.175s, user 0m10.967s, sys 0m7.034s > >> Result: The 'my' way is a winner, easier and quick. :-) > > So what is the major difference between your setup and mine? Explained above, my point is total of time and how waste the time it was. However, I will beat you in no time to finish the total of time to do the CVSup, pkg_version -l \<, pkgdb -F and portupgrade -ra. When, you do the CVSup, make index, portsdb -u, portversion -l "<" and finally do the portupgrade -ra. The time does matter. Cheers, Mezz >> But, I don't know how it will make the difference if I have the 9,000 >> packages installed. > > 231 installed on the PII, 188 on the P4, all built from ports. > > > [1] http://halplant.com:88/software/FreeBSD/scripts/update_fbsd > [2] http://halplant.com:88/systems.html > [3] Find disk specs for the Optiplex GX400 on Dell's web site and win > a prize for persistence in the face of crappy design and slow > delivery. > > > -Andrew- -- bsdforums.org 's moderator, mezz.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?oprxtglyjt8ckrg5>