Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:27:01 +0100
From:      Ulrich Spoerlein <q@galgenberg.net>
To:        Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, "\[LoN\]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de>
Subject:   Re: portupgrade slow
Message-ID:  <20060210182701.GA1109@galgenberg.net>
In-Reply-To: <20060207203725.61f12be9@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
References:  <43E711DB.40608@gmx.de> <20060207181150.GH1060@galgenberg.net> <20060207203725.61f12be9@Magellan.Leidinger.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>While 15 to 30 minutes is really long, and I think Ulrich found your
>problem, portupgrade is a memory hog nowadays... but we have 14k ports
>which the pgktools keep in a DB in some way (as a graph), so is anyone
>out there who speaks ruby and is willing to have a look if this can be
>optimized?

I think it's the dependancy checking. Compare the startup time of=20
portupgrade -na vs. portupgrade -Ona

Ulrich Spoerlein
--=20
  PGP Key ID: 20FEE9DD				Encrypted mail welcome!
Fingerprint: AEC9 AF5E 01AC 4EE1 8F70  6CBD E76E 2227 20FE E9DD
Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
Don't know. Don't care.

--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFD7Nr1524iJyD+6d0RAqzDAJ4oqcEMxVcKFKY46GF4IWxlHH/sWACfbspr
fRM1W9tL3AlQQzjPtejFQ5g=
=x5Er
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060210182701.GA1109>