Re: [Pulp-dev] Content Signing for Pulp 3.y -- Use Cases

Thank you everyone who participated in the discussion earlier today. I have moved the content to a google doc[0]. You can find the summary of today's discussion below the use cases. The full log of the discussion is here[1]. I would like to continue the discussion at 9 AM EST (in your time zone

Re: [Pulp-dev] Memory consumption on RPM sync

Fabricio, this is great work! One thing that stands out is that a very large amount of time is being spent in remove_duplicates(), 65% of the total runtime of the sync. - 13% of the total runtime spent on this inside cast() https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/blob/master/pulpcore/plugin/repo_

Re: [Pulp-dev] Memory consumption on RPM sync

The only difference between CentOS and RHEL repos is the Errata. So my guess is that the memory consumption problem is introduced by how we keep track of Errata and relationships to packages. Not sure how to fix it though. On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 1:21 PM Fabricio Aguiar wrote: > I forgot to ment

Re: [Pulp-dev] Memory consumption on RPM sync

I forgot to mention on my initial email, it was not an FYI, my intention in bringing these data was getting some discussion on what we should do to improve the performance and file some specific issues. Best regards, Fabricio Aguiar Software Engineer, Pulp Project Red Hat Brazil - Latam

Re: [Pulp-dev] Memory consumption on RPM sync

Great results! I have tried to apply the same procedure like you, as I am currently working on a similar issue (https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5689), but there is one problem. I could not run performance tests with additional profilers because my workstation run out of memory after a couple of minute

Re: [Pulp-dev] Pulp 3.0.0 GA Date -- Dec 12

title correction: Dec 12th On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 11:08 AM Brian Bouterse wrote: > > > We're planning one final release candidate 3.0.0rc9 for Dec 3rd, and a > generally available release with improved documentation on Dec 12th. This > will include pulp_rpm, pulp_container, and pulp_file as we

[Pulp-dev] Pulp 3.0.0 GA Date -- Dec 13

We're planning one final release candidate 3.0.0rc9 for Dec 3rd, and a generally available release with improved documentation on Dec 12th. This will include pulp_rpm, pulp_container, and pulp_file as well. This is a delay from the initial GA release date of Dec 3rd. Read the blog post for more

Re: [Pulp-dev] Cherry pick process

I've filed an issue here: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5808. Feedback on the issue is welcome. David On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 8:51 AM Brian Bouterse wrote: > Filing more issues sounds good. Email notifications sound good. Can we > start with the bare minimum so we can get something basic going s

Re: [Pulp-dev] Cherry pick process

Filing more issues sounds good. Email notifications sound good. Can we start with the bare minimum so we can get something basic going soon? On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 7:55 AM David Davis wrote: > Yes but it's complicated. Travis does have a setting for email > notifications[0]. However, I don't th

Re: [Pulp-dev] Cherry pick process

Yes but it's complicated. Travis does have a setting for email notifications[0]. However, I don't think you can configure it specifically to notify on failed cron jobs and we'd have to expose this setting via the plugin_template. There's also the problem that Travis will notify you for forks that a

Re: [Pulp-dev] Cherry pick process

+1 to the automation of the process Can we configure Travis to send an e-mail if the job fails and not rely on human checking it every time? Tanya On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 6:14 PM David Davis wrote: > I opened an issue to outline the design we're discussing: > > https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5795