Description of problem: Calling system.getName() takes too long to return results. On a large database, it can take 1-2 hours to iterate all hosts. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 5.3.0 updated to current patches in June 2010 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. retrieve a set of system ID's (either manually or via the system.getID() API call 2. Iterate over those ID's using the system.getName() call. 3. each iteration of system.getName() takes about 10-12 seconds on a database of 900 hosts. Actual results: A script to interate over 800 hosts takes over 140 minutes. (at 11 seconds per database call for each system.getName(). Expected results: system.getName() should be able to return from the database much quicker Additional info: Examples from /var/log/rhn/rhn_web_api.log: system.getName() [2010-09-29 17:15:47,004] INFO - REQUESTED FROM: *callerIp* CALL: system.getName(12838136x3024bace156940335054c4ef4da9e51a, 1000011298) CALLER: (sat_api) TIME: 10.918 seconds [2010-09-29 17:15:57,875] INFO - REQUESTED FROM: *callerIp* CALL: system.getName(12838136x3024bace156940335054c4ef4da9e51a, 1000013139) CALLER: (sat_api) TIME: 10.863 seconds system.provisioning.snapshot.listSnapshots() [2010-09-20 00:02:53,205] INFO - REQUESTED FROM: *callerIp* CALL: system.provisioning.snapshot.listSnapshots(12816241xda34397b1bd286dcbd17b2b1b58406ee, 1000018669, {}) CALLER: (sat_api) TIME: 0.02 seconds [2010-09-20 00:02:53,251] INFO - REQUESTED FROM: *callerIp* CALL: system.provisioning.snapshot.listSnapshots(12816241xda34397b1bd286dcbd17b2b1b58406ee, 1000018808, {}) CALLER: (sat_api) TIME: 0.019 seconds system.listsubscribedBaseChannel() [2010-09-08 13:16:35,919] INFO - REQUESTED FROM: *callerIp* CALL: system.getSubscribedBaseChannel(12794521x2611865d4f22fe626af3fadfc5531c93, 1000013467) CALLER: (dsglaser) TIME: 0.019 seconds [2010-09-08 13:16:35,950] INFO - REQUESTED FROM: *callerIp* CALL: system.listSubscribedChildChannels(12794521x2611865d4f22fe626af3fadfc5531c93, 1000013467) CALLER: (dsglaser) TIME: 0.022 seconds
Isn't this duplicate of bug 575796?
Doh, I knew this sounded familiar. Thanks Simon. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 575796 ***