Hey Adam, It's not expected for subsequent migrations to take equally long, that is strange and concerning. This is with the very latest version of the migration plugin (0.5.0)? Is it actually equally long, or just not 'reasonably' faster? Is it only the "migrating rpm content to Pulp 3 erratum" sub-item which reports doing a lot of work or are many of them doing so?
I do have some good news though, the 6-7 hour runtime will improve significantly once you can upgrade to 3.7.2 (which doesn't look like it has been pushed to the Foreman repositories yet). There was a significant performance regression introduced by 3.7.0 which has been fixed, and in my testing migrations only took a bit more than 1/3 as long as they had been taking previously. On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 10:47 AM Winberg Adam <[email protected]> wrote: > Depending on the size of your pulp2 installation I understand that the > 2to3migration can take quite some time. In my environment it takes approx. > 6-7hrs. However, I expect consecutive migrations to be faster, based on the > documentation: > > "When you are ready to switch to Pulp 3: run migration, then stop Pulp 2 > services (so no new data is coming in), run migration for the last time (it > should not take long)." > > > But all my migration runs are equally long, the 'sub-task' "Migrating rpm > content to Pulp 3 erratum" processes about 90000 items every time which > takes a long time. Is this expected behaviour? > > > Thanks, > > Adam > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
_______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
