Bug#682156: groupdel performance
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 03:56:40PM -0400, Matt Barry wrote: > We can do as suggested above and remove our own (arguably superfluous) > check, and take the minor performance win. You have my approval, go ahead if you feel like doing so. Greetings Marc
Bug#682156: groupdel performance
On Thu, 2022-07-14 at 21:54 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 03:00:50PM -0400, Matt Barry wrote: > > Any objections to either moving this bug to passwd, or just > > wontfix'ing > > this? > > No objection from me, I'd just reassign the bug. If we can do > something > to speed deletion up while having more pretty code, we should do that > anyway though. To make the test fast enough to be realistically runnable, I had to replace even useradd/groupadd with direct writes to /etc/passwd et al. So.. no prettier code to be had here. :( We can do as suggested above and remove our own (arguably superfluous) check, and take the minor performance win.
Bug#682156: groupdel performance
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 03:00:50PM -0400, Matt Barry wrote: > Any objections to either moving this bug to passwd, or just wontfix'ing > this? No objection from me, I'd just reassign the bug. If we can do something to speed deletion up while having more pretty code, we should do that anyway though. Greetings Marc -- - Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Leimen, Germany| lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421
Bug#682156: groupdel performance
Hi, I have added a test to benchmark the deletion of groups on a system with tens of thousands of users, and it is indeed (still) not great. However, removing the overhead described in this bug (and replacing it with *nothing*) only yields < 10-15% speed-up. I would not be opposed to relying on the failure of userdel if it meant a real boost, but I am tempted to say that this decade-old problem might be better taken up with the passwd package. Here is a snippet of the performance test output. The times for comparable groups are shown both for delgroup and for groupdel. ok 2 - populated 1 groups in 4 seconds (< 120). ok 3 - command success: /usr/sbin/delgroup --quiet dgpg_3 ok 4 - delgroup dgpg_3 took 8s (< 30). ok 5 - command success: /usr/sbin/delgroup --quiet dgpg_ ok 6 - delgroup dgpg_ took 9s (< 30). ok 7 - command success: /usr/sbin/delgroup --quiet dgpg_ ok 8 - delgroup dgpg_ took 11s (< 30). ok 9 - command success: /usr/sbin/delgroup --quiet dgpg_9998 ok 10 - delgroup dgpg_9998 took 13s (< 30). ok 11 - command success: /usr/sbin/groupdel dgpg_4 ok 12 - groupdel dgpg_4 took 11s (< 30). ok 13 - command success: /usr/sbin/groupdel dgpg_3334 ok 14 - groupdel dgpg_3334 took 10s (< 30). ok 15 - command success: /usr/sbin/groupdel dgpg_6667 ok 16 - groupdel dgpg_6667 took 11s (< 30). ok 17 - command success: /usr/sbin/groupdel dgpg_ ok 18 - groupdel dgpg_ took 13s (< 30). Any objections to either moving this bug to passwd, or just wontfix'ing this? Cheers, Matt signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
