Re: [gentoo-user] Should emerge --sync be so slow?
Hello! On Thursday 20 October 2005 03:26, Richard Fish wrote: Alex Bennee wrote: As my system has become more lived in I've noticed the time taken to update the cache at the end of an emerge --sync is getting slower and slower. The system will hang around 50% for a long time and thrash the crap out of the disks. Is this just usual behaviour for portage? Is there anyway to flush the cache files and start again with a clean emerge --sync? Well, you could try this: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Several people here (including me) are using this without any bad effects. You might also consider putting /usr/portage on it's own filesystem. That would keep the disk accessed confined to a small portion of the disk. The size should be 1-3G depending upon whether you keep distfiles and packages on the same filesystem or not. I do have portage on the separate partition, but this caching process is _DAMN_ slow. I remember times when it was really, really fast. WTF? -Richard Best regards, Andrew. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Should emerge --sync be so slow?
On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 18:48 +0400, Andrew Kirilenko wrote: I do have portage on the separate partition, but this caching process is _DAMN_ slow. I remember times when it was really, really fast. WTF? http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108412 Regards, Paul -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Should emerge --sync be so slow?
As my system has become more lived in I've noticed the time taken to update the cache at the end of an emerge --sync is getting slower and slower. The system will hang around 50% for a long time and thrash the crap out of the disks. Is this just usual behaviour for portage? Is there anyway to flush the cache files and start again with a clean emerge --sync? -- Alex, homepage: http://www.bennee.com/~alex/ signal(i, SIG_DFL); /* crunch, crunch, crunch */ -- Larry Wall in doarg.c from the perl source code -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Should emerge --sync be so slow?
Alex Bennee wrote: As my system has become more lived in I've noticed the time taken to update the cache at the end of an emerge --sync is getting slower and slower. The system will hang around 50% for a long time and thrash the crap out of the disks. Is this just usual behaviour for portage? Is there anyway to flush the cache files and start again with a clean emerge --sync? Well, you could try this: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Several people here (including me) are using this without any bad effects. You might also consider putting /usr/portage on it's own filesystem. That would keep the disk accessed confined to a small portion of the disk. The size should be 1-3G depending upon whether you keep distfiles and packages on the same filesystem or not. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Should emerge --sync be so slow?
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Richard Fish wrote: Well, you could try this: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Several people here (including me) are using this without any bad effects. I noticed this broke after the recent Python upgrade - I had to remove the module to run emerge. -- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Should emerge --sync be so slow?
On Thursday 20 October 2005 01:19 am, A. Khattri wrote: On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Richard Fish wrote: Well, you could try this: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Several people here (including me) are using this without any bad effects. I noticed this broke after the recent Python upgrade - I had to remove the module to run emerge. Yes, but all you need to do is (as the python update ebuild reported but many of us missed) run python-updater and it would have resolved the issue. It was due to relocation of the libraries for py 2.4 vs 2.3 Run python-updater and then restore the cdb module. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
