Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

2016/10/23 20:42、Alive 4ever のメッセージ: >> On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 01:57:23AM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general >> wrote: >> On 10/23/2016 01:41 AM, Alive 4ever wrote: Also consider the fact that your pacman database is one of the least likely pieces of data to

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 01:57:23AM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > On 10/23/2016 01:41 AM, Alive 4ever wrote: > >> Also consider the fact that your pacman database is one of the least > >> likely pieces of data to target for the sake of noticeably improving > >> your computer's

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

Op 21 okt. 2016 21:49 schreef "Eli Schwartz via arch-general" < arch-general@archlinux.org>: > > On 10/21/2016 01:20 PM, Alive 4ever wrote: > [...] road map, it would be better to use > > single sql based database for tracking locally installed packages > > The reason pacman uses a flat file

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On 10/23/2016 01:41 AM, Alive 4ever wrote: >> Also consider the fact that your pacman database is one of the least >> likely pieces of data to target for the sake of noticeably improving >> your computer's overall performance. >> > > Yeah, I am aware of it. Hardware components tend to degrade

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 08:35:15PM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > Right... but if you look at the stated reason for its removal, you tend > to get the impression that the lead pacman developer is actually > explicitly calling you (rhet.) a blithering idiot if you (rhet.) think >

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On 10/22/2016 02:28 AM, Alive 4ever wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:06:04PM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote: >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 03:53:20 + >> Alive 4ever wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 08:03:53PM +0200, Tinu Weber wrote: >>> Currently, pacman package includes a

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 04:06:31 + Alive 4ever wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 02:15:01AM +0800, Chi-Hsuan Yen via arch-general > wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Robin via arch-general < > > arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > I

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 02:20:30PM +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > As the currently lead pacman developer... We will never have a sql (or > other) database backend. > > When we did tests for the sync backends, using a single tar file gave > the same speed-up as using some sql variant (and we still

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:06:04PM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote: > On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 03:53:20 + > Alive 4ever wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 08:03:53PM +0200, Tinu Weber wrote: > > Currently, pacman package includes a ``pacman-optimize`` script to do > > manual

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On 22/10/16 14:06, Alive 4ever wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 02:15:01AM +0800, Chi-Hsuan Yen via arch-general > wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Robin via arch-general < >> arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

As the currently lead pacman developer... We will never have a sql (or other) database backend. When we did tests for the sync backends, using a single tar file gave the same speed-up as using some sql variant (and we still have not optimised any reading from that - for the sync "dbs", we

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 02:15:01AM +0800, Chi-Hsuan Yen via arch-general wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Robin via arch-general < > arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took longer than 'apt' > > > counterparts. > > Sounds

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 03:53:20 + Alive 4ever wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 08:03:53PM +0200, Tinu Weber wrote: > Currently, pacman package includes a ``pacman-optimize`` script to do > manual periodic local database optimization. Not for long.

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 08:03:53PM +0200, Tinu Weber wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 17:20:53 +, Alive 4ever wrote: > > [...] It seems that the local pacman databases are just subdirectories > > with text files (desc, files) and gzipped text (mtree). > > No wonder why local pacman databases

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:44:42PM +0200, G. Schlisio wrote: > optimisation ideas to the pacman database are (nearly) as old as this > distribution, but none ever really convinced many. > if you go back through the archives of the mailinglists and forums (as > well as the outer parts of the

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

> I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took longer than 'apt' > counterparts. It seems that the local pacman databases are just > subdirectories with text files (desc, files) and gzipped text (mtree). > No wonder why local pacman databases tend to slow down over time and > need to be

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

Am 21.10.2016 um 21:48 schrieb Eli Schwartz via arch-general: The reason pacman uses a flat file database as opposed to a relational database, is the result of a deliberate design decision by the lead pacman developers. Therefore, I really really really doubt you will be able to convince them

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On 10/21/2016 01:20 PM, Alive 4ever wrote: > I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took longer than 'apt' > counterparts. It seems that the local pacman databases are just > subdirectories with text files (desc, files) and gzipped text (mtree). > No wonder why local pacman databases tend

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Robin via arch-general < arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > Hi, > > > I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took longer than 'apt' > > counterparts. > Sounds interesting but I have a few question about how did you measure > this and how big the

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 17:20:53 +, Alive 4ever wrote: > [...] It seems that the local pacman databases are just subdirectories > with text files (desc, files) and gzipped text (mtree). > No wonder why local pacman databases tend to slow down over time and > need to be optimized periodically.

Re: [arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

Hi, > I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took longer than 'apt' > counterparts. Sounds interesting but I have a few question about how did you measure this and how big the difference is. (Shouldn't be that big). Would be great if you provide more information on the comparability of

[arch-general] Implement sql/sqlite database for pacman local database

I was curious why does 'pacman -Q' operations took longer than 'apt' counterparts. It seems that the local pacman databases are just subdirectories with text files (desc, files) and gzipped text (mtree). No wonder why local pacman databases tend to slow down over time and need to be optimized