This issue has been resolved. Thanks for your assistance everyone.
Changing /etc/nsswitch.conf from "passwd: compat" to read "passwd: files"
resolved the issue.
Thanks
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "cpghost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: ls -l takes a forever to finish.
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:28:23 -0600
"Mark Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
this program seems to have the same issues with it.
[Please don't top post.]
Of course, if "ls -lf" has those issues, "sortls.py" will
have them too, because it just runs it and sorts its output
externally with another sorting algorithm. sortls.py speeds
up "ls -l" considerably for huge (10,000+ entries) directories
by using another sorting algorithm, it doesn't do anything else.
Just to ask again: while you're waiting for "ls -lf", what
does "top" say? Is that process accumulating CPU time, or
is it just sitting around waiting, waiting, waiting...?
Are you using NFS or another file system where stat(2) is
expensive?
Thanks
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "cpghost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bill Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Wojciech Puchar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Mark Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 8:42 AM
Subject: Re: ls -l takes a forever to finish.
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:42:44 -0500
> Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In response to Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> > > ls | wc
>> >
>> > strange. i did
>> >
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/b]$ a=0;while [ $a -lt 10000 ];do mkdir
>> > $a;a=$[a+1];done
>> >
>> > completed <25 seconds on 1Ghz CPU
>> >
>> > ls takes 0.1 seconds user time, ls -l takes 0.3 second user time.
>> >
>> > unless you have 486/33 or slower system there is something wrong.
>>
>> Another possible scenario is that the directory is badly
>> fragmented. Unless something has changed since I last researched
>> this (which is possible) FreeBSD doesn't manage directory
>> fragmentation during use. If you're constantly adding and removing
>> files, it's possible that the directory entry is such a mess that
>> it takes ls a long time to process it.
>
> Yes, that's also possible. But sorting is really the culprit here:
> it *is* possible to create a directory with filenames in such a way
> that it triggers Quicksort's O(N^2) worst case instead of O(N log
> N).
>
> The following Python (2.5) program calls "ls -lf" and sorts its
> output with Python's own stable sort() routine (which is NOT
> qsort(3)). On a directory with 44,000 entries, it runs orders of
> magnitude faster than "ls -l", even though it has to use the
> decorate-sort-undecorate idiom to sort the output according
> according the filename, and it is interpreted rather than compiled!
>
> I guess that replacing qsort(3) in
> /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/fts.c:fts_sort()
> with another sort algorithm which doesn't
> expose this anomaly would solve that problem.
--------------------- cut here ------------------ cut here ------------
#!/usr/bin/env python
# sortls.py -- sort output of ls -lf with python's stable sort routine.
import os
def sort_ls_lf(path):
"Sort the output of ls -lf path"
os.chdir(path)
lines = os.popen("ls -lf", "r").readlines()
dsu = [ (line.split()[-1], line) for line in lines ]
dsu.sort()
return ''.join(tupl[1] for tupl in dsu)
if __name__ == '__main__':
import sys
if len(sys.argv) < 2:
print >>sys.stderr, "Usage:", sys.argv[0], "path"
sys.exit(1)
path = sys.argv[1]
try:
print sort_ls_lf(path)
except IOError:
pass # silently absorb broken pipe and other errors
--------------------- cut here ------------------ cut here ------------
-cpghost.
--
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.25/744 - Release Date: 4/3/2007
5:32 AM
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
