Hide Forgot
Description of problem: Have 6k hosts registered to setup. Selected an errata which is applicable for 4K+ hosts. Took more than 6 mins to list content -> errata -> any errata -> Applicable content Hosts of respective errata GET https://gprfc018.sbu.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com/api/v...h=(+applicable_errata+%3D+%22RHBA-2015:2115%22+) 200 OK 6m 35s Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1.with Scale environment content -> errata -> any errata -> Applicable content Hosts of respective errata 2. 3. Actual results: List Applicable content Hosts of respective errata at scale takes long time Expected results: Take lesser time to open Additional info:
Created attachment 1245533 [details] postgresql mem @errata for 4k
Created attachment 1245534 [details] postgresql opetations
Created attachment 1245535 [details] memory growth while listing applicable hosts for errata
Created attachment 1245537 [details] ruby memory growth while listing 4k hosts for errata
Created attachment 1245538 [details] memory usage per process while true; do (date && ps aux --sort -rss | head -n20) >> /var/log/foreman/ps-aux2.log; sleep 60; done
I have configured logging of queries longer than 1sec: log_min_duration_statement = 1000 and refreshed the page, but it did not shown anything. Then I have displayed number of transactions processed by server (well, one transaction can have 0 - more queries), refreshed the page and checked the transaction count again: postgres=# SELECT sum(xact_commit+xact_rollback) FROM pg_stat_database; sum -------- 810380 (1 row) ...refresh and wait: postgres=# SELECT sum(xact_commit+xact_rollback) FROM pg_stat_database; sum -------- 939428 (1 row) I.e. almost 130k transactions to refresh one page. Well, there is something else running on the Satllite, but still.
Created redmine issue http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/18652 from this bug
I'm not seeing this behavior on the reproducer anymore. I'm selecting a specific Errata and going to the Content Hosts tab. Is this the correct workflow?
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1417642 ***