On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 14:16:39 -0500 Jerry McBride
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Wrong solution. You do realise that the updating Portage cache
| thing is due to a Portage deficiency,
|
| Portage deficency? You mean the fact that python scans some
| thousands of files in the file based database, writing as it goes?
Nope. The fact that Portage uses that second level of cache at all.
| and that the real cache is centrally generated, right?
|
| Yup, from thousands of files in the file based database...
|
| Portage is a wonderful tool for package management, but the sheer
| size of the beast begs for movig it to C and a proper database. I
| remember in the early days of my gentoo experience that portage
| wasn't a bother. But as ebuilds are added to portage and my choice of
| installed ebuilds grows... portage has become quite a slug
| performance wise. I guess this is where the IT types step in and say
| it scales poorly.
The scalability issues have nothing to do with us using files.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature