Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 13:44:56 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: Michael Grimm <trashcan@ellael.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pkg-1.7.0 is an order of magnitude slower than pkg-1.6.4 Message-ID: <20160404114456.GB49864@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <57024639.30903@quip.cz> References: <6DD156C6-C3E1-43BC-8EC5-1ACB16EBFC3E@ellael.org> <20160402124845.GM1128@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <05DDCF70-8865-4F1F-A264-3000B8EF5244@ellael.org> <20160402130047.GN1128@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <57024639.30903@quip.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--+g7M9IMkV8truYOl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 12:47:21PM +0200, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin wrote on 04/02/2016 15:00: > > On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 02:59:06PM +0200, Michael Grimm wrote: > >> Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 02:42:06PM +0200, Michael Grimm wrote: > >> > >>>> 26 seconds for 74 ports within a jail and pkg-1.6.4: > >> [=E2=80=A6] > >>>> 309 seconds for the very same 74 ports within the very same jail and= pkg-1.7.0: > >> [=E2=80=A6] > >>>> Is this an expected slow-down? /usr/ports/UPGRADE and https://svnweb= =2Efreebsd.org/ports/head/ports-mgmt/pkg/?view=3Dlog are not indicating tha= t behavior. > >>>> But I might have missed something. > >>>> > >>>> Any feedback is highly appriciated, thanks, and regards, > >>> > >>> pkg 1.7 is IO intensive that may explain. > >> > >> Ok, understood. > >> > >> JFTR: perl (24s), python27 (44s), and ruby (125s) take the longest tim= e to reinstall. > >> > >>> I plan to readd some improvements on this side before 1.8 > >> > >> Good to know, thanks for your feedback. > >> > > Thank you very very much for yours! very much appreciated, it helps imp= roving > > things! >=20 > I already upgraded to 1.7.1. Is it possible to downgrade it back to=20 > 1.6.4 or are there some incompatible changes in database? (I can build=20 > 1.6.4 by downgrading the port in my poudriere) No incompatibilities so you can downgrade >=20 > And I have one question about this info from commit message: > ------------------ > - if the all process operation would have an inpact of less than 1MB on= =20 > the FS then the action is proceed with out asking the user to acknowledge= it > ------------------ >=20 > Does it means that pkg upgrade, pkg autoremove etc. will proceed without= =20 > asking Y/N? > Is this behavior configurable and can it be reverted? The purpose of pkg 1.7.1 was to fix that regression (your quote explains the regression) Bapt --+g7M9IMkV8truYOl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXAlO4AAoJEGOJi9zxtz5atSIQAIwc/J8SAHx/IOKYdGH9IMEN vvp2/UpKNiHqyvBT+UAy14JwzpjGo2oa/CJ8STL5aVGduFfqfZHMHINbV5V/UCQg snXmYK4VBD0CXMscq5j6VhqW3Ne8CM/6hif/t+0BfkUQOk/XZswYEh/QB1vUdXUY XLsr4Yw4v0kWlzxRa4VRokE5zFTSPbf8s5TDF89FKRRrFnrrWhghW1Gu9NlT9mHJ aQxgMqzuAhHDJetYtmUVkbtaVOqU/bNyKAswOJ2CEdXGOsPX91KYYI9S46IJTzgy g062vsuT6Lf4nrXAMfAbiSm/Q2J9W0KwzpNbcJobz0foHwDpHqIVeDoq5ubd/qna ri4iRcZYv9rRtyqR6LJLy2P1HPJPAXePPuDjY8SL6rg2t46cHeZAcigkrWcGgwbv HVNUfy8D6y6TMOucEyTH8nfilKrqhGbRA6aDy5R+I9y5vjjp0QhC5JXtbNOz5QSC kzjJq2jGfhFEuZTW2YMBbi6cxvkJRqW7Wy+/cepWBToNaEkPWDKNXM9yXemyTLuA /j9tm76rX4WmKC/oxXOUKM5vVVfBa5vvFz+zFr9S2tq82Op+DATYCz0NBkkSjPBq +F9IZHni91e/tPvRhW/a44BQ48b2Q5SfhEw/DqBbB1kuZeJ64bzFRLZGU10REjfX kzB99wG2Q4tMWGTwpZ80 =HRUL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+g7M9IMkV8truYOl--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160404114456.GB49864>