On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 at 07:45, Dusty Mabe <du...@dustymabe.com> wrote: > > > On 7/29/22 12:05, Peter Robinson wrote: > >> Looks like dnf makecache is uses a lot more memory, causing issues on > >> smaller systems/containers. > >> > >> F34: > >> > >> Metadata cache created. > >> 1.51user 0.15system 0:12.01elapsed 13%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata > 162440maxresident)k > >> 144inputs+56outputs (0major+46906minor)pagefaults 0swaps > >> > >> > >> F35: > >> > >> Metadata cache created. > >> 29.28user 2.15system 0:49.94elapsed 62%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata > 841704maxresident)k > >> 184160inputs+497320outputs (181major+425900minor)pagefaults 0swaps > >> > >> Is this a known issue? > > > > I've seen it on arm systems with 512Mb RAM which previously ran dnf > > (not just makecache) fine and now don't. There was a bug opened but > > the dnf team closed it. > > > Seems like this bug is related > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907030 > > We are hitting this issue in Fedora CoreOS CI on VMs with 1G of RAM. >
I wonder if this is one of those problems where microdnf needs to be used until the full dnf rewrite in C++ is done. I remember something about memory usage and dnf vs microdnf a while ago for smaller memory systems.. and with the general 'we need to double memory usage' every couple of releases that applications have ... maybe 1Gb is no longer valid? -- Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- Ian MacClaren
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
