On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 16:08 -0400, James Antill wrote: > On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 09:11 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 02:22 -0400, James Antill wrote: > > > Maybe this was more obvious to others, but: > > > > > > yum --enablerepo=development upgrade > > > > > > ...takes about twice as long (and uses about 100MB more) as: > > > > > > yum --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=development upgrade > > > > > > > well, you are diminishing the number of packages to search through by > > about half. > > Yeh, I tried to do some code so we can have "newest pkgs" data directly > in MetaSack so the sqlitesack code could say things like "if this pkg > isn't the newest, skip the requires/provides searches" ... but it wasn't > pretty, and didn't save much (roughly 10% RSS / 5% CPU). > > So I had another idea, just do something like the above (which is > probably what the user would do if they knew) ... have a configuration > option in the repo section that says "when this repo. is enabled, these > other repos should be disabled". > > With the following patch, I added the following (in the corresponding > repo. sections): > > [development] > auto_disable_repos = fedora, updates, updates-testing > > [development-debuginfo] > auto_disable_repos = fedora-debuginfo, updates-debuginfo, > updates-testing-debuginfo > > > [livna-development] > auto_disable_repos = livna > > [livna-development-debuginfo] > auto_disable_repos = livna-debuginfo > > ...gives me about 33% CPU (30 secs from 45) 33% RSS (163MB from 243, VSZ > also down by about 80MB to 393MB from 473MB)[1]. > > Patch is at: > > http://people.redhat.com/jantill/yum/patches/auto-disable-repos.patch > > ...the way it is there you can still do: > > --enablerepo=development --enablerepo=fedora > > ...if you really want to. > > > So RFC time: > > . Anyone think the feature is too magic? Any suggestions to make it less > magic (add option to disable, add log messages saying what we are > doing?) > > . Anyone hate the config. variable name? > > . Anyone want the option to be more powerful? Ie. if you have > updates-debuginfo on, and you do --enablerepo=updates-testing we > probably want to turn updates-testing-debuginfo on. > >
Seriously, I think this not something worth adding to yum. Maintaining these lists is doom, especially as more repos get added/subtracted and frankly if a user complains about yum being slow or taking up too much memory and they're loading repos they aren't using then I think that falls into the category of "Dr, it hurts when I do this! Don't do that, then." -1 -sv _______________________________________________ Yum-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
