Bug 639363 - system.getName() API call takes too long to return results
Summary: system.getName() API call takes too long to return results
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 575796
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Satellite 5
Classification: Red Hat
Component: API
Version: 530
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Tomas Lestach
QA Contact: Red Hat Satellite QA List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 462714
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-10-01 14:45 UTC by David Glaser
Modified: 2010-10-01 15:15 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Linux <hostname> 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 #1 SMP Sun May 2 04:17:42 EDT 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Last Closed: 2010-10-01 15:15:50 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description David Glaser 2010-10-01 14:45:08 UTC
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

Comment 1 Šimon Lukašík 2010-10-01 15:09:55 UTC
Isn't this duplicate of bug 575796?

Comment 2 Justin Sherrill 2010-10-01 15:15:50 UTC
Doh,  I knew this sounded familiar.  Thanks Simon.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 575796 ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.