|Summary:||RPM performance bad|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Thomas M Steenholdt <tmus>|
|Component:||rpm||Assignee:||Jeff Johnson <jbj>|
|Status:||CLOSED NOTABUG||QA Contact:||Mike McLean <mikem>|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2005-03-10 20:14:33 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
Description Thomas M Steenholdt 2005-03-10 14:31:00 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #118187 +++ From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040124 Description of problem: I have noticed that rpm seems very slow and uses a lot of cpu. # time rpm -qa |wc -l 488 real 0m10.765s user 0m8.560s sys 0m0.194s Granted, this is on a 550MHz P-III machine, but a similarly sized machine running a different rpm based distro does the same thing in less than 20% of this time. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): rpm-4.3.2-21 (other versioner are affected too) How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.run time rpm -qa >/dev/null or something similar 2.notice cpu usage hits the roof and query takes longer than it should 3. Actual Results: rpm slow to complete transaction Expected Results: better performance (comparable to other rpm based distros), less CPU usage Additional info:
Comment 1 Paul Nasrat 2005-03-10 14:46:38 UTC
You can run rpm --stats -qa for a better breakdown. If you are going to compare performance with another rpm version it's helpful to have the version, vendor, stats, etc. Also testing against the same rpmdb would make sense.
Comment 2 Jeff Johnson 2005-03-10 18:40:25 UTC
Bad compared to what?
Comment 3 Thomas M Steenholdt 2005-03-10 19:31:21 UTC
Well, i guess i have to admit that I was a little eager on the trigger with this bug. investigating the performance a little further brings the followinf info. The rpm version i'm comparing to is a version 3 from SuSE. It seems like this version is a little lighter on the system because it either lack the digest/signature functionality of later rpm versions or at least doesn't exercise those functios quite as often. My system spends most of the time doing signature work # rpm --stats -qa >/dev/null total: 1 0.000000 MB 9.571010 secs digest: 970 14.196385 MB 0.564451 secs signature: 468 0.000000 MB 7.223979 secs dbget: 541 14.529588 MB 1.120793 secs Guessing that this is just not done in the SuSE version, disabling the functionality in my FC3 version, changes the picture completely # rpm --stats --nosignature -qa >/dev/null total: 1 0.000000 MB 1.374332 secs digest: 970 14.194000 MB 0.562437 secs dbget: 490 14.455532 MB 0.278045 secs This pretty much closes the entire discussion for me (should have done all this before even filing the bug, sorry about that) and the only thing i would like to know is, are there a valid reason for checking signature of each and every package in a simple "list" operation like -qa?
Comment 4 Jeff Johnson 2005-03-10 20:14:33 UTC
The Principle of Least Surprise says check header signatures everywhere and always. Meanwhile, signature checking on queries can be globally disabled by adding to /etc/rpm/macros %_vsflags_query -1