[gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
I see that portage is updating its cache for about 20 minutes these days!!! This is on an Athlon 600MHz box with 384MB PC133. Updating Portage cache: 50% Just trying to do a sync Tom Veldhouse -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
On 3/17/06, Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see that portage is updating its cache for about 20 minutes these days!!! This is on an Athlon 600MHz box with 384MB PC133. Updating Portage cache: 50% Just trying to do a sync Good question :) But one way to speed this up is to use CDB, so that instead of keeping cache in separate files, it's all in one, resulting in a *much* faster cache update. There are directions here: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb HTH -- Bruno Lustosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lustosa.net/ -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
Bruno Lustosa wrote: Good question :) But one way to speed this up is to use CDB, so that instead of keeping cache in separate files, it's all in one, resulting in a *much* faster cache update. There are directions here: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Interesting ... and thanks for the tip. I am concerned about all the warnings of breakage though. I need this on my server, which is my production firewall at the moment. I would hate to have this fail. Tom Veldhouse -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
On 3/17/06, Bruno Lustosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/17/06, Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see that portage is updating its cache for about 20 minutes these days!!! This is on an Athlon 600MHz box with 384MB PC133. Updating Portage cache: 50% Just trying to do a sync Good question :) But one way to speed this up is to use CDB, so that instead of keeping cache in separate files, it's all in one, resulting in a *much* faster cache update. There are directions here: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb New versions of portage are using a different approuch on metadata and cache, after sync'ng, a week later it took like 1 minute to update the cache with the new version. My advice, update portage, emerge --metadata, wait for it to finish (yes, will take a LOT of time, your machine is below 1GHz, wich will slow it even more), but in the end, you'll update much faster. CDB is just a workaround and you can't use it with the most recent version of portage. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: Bruno Lustosa wrote: Good question :) But one way to speed this up is to use CDB, so that instead of keeping cache in separate files, it's all in one, resulting in a *much* faster cache update. There are directions here: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Interesting ... and thanks for the tip. I am concerned about all the warnings of breakage though. I need this on my server, which is my production firewall at the moment. I would hate to have this fail. Well, you know, in worst case, portage doesn't work anymore. In this case, you'd just have to revert your changes, and everything's fine again. Alexander Skwar -- Linux: Where Don't We Want To Go Today? -- Submitted by Pancrazio De Mauro, paraphrasing some well-known sales talk -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
On Friday 17 March 2006 15:02, Bruno Lustosa wrote: Good question :) But one way to speed this up is to use CDB, so that instead of keeping cache in separate files, it's all in one, resulting in a *much* faster cache update. There are directions here: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb And if you go back one step you'll find other ways to speed up Portage. http://gentoo-wiki.com/Index:TIP#Portage_Speed What I do is keep $PORTDIR and $DISTDIR on seperate partitions. Having a small partition for $PORTDIR ensures that all of Portage will be in the same place on the harddrive. $DISTDIR is on a separate partition because otherwise it wouldn't be a small partition. ;) $PKGDIR is not on a separate partition because I don't use it. Also Portage 2.1 (which is not supported by cdb) is nice. :) -- Bo Andresen -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
On 3/17/06, Thomas T. Veldhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruno Lustosa wrote: Good question :) But one way to speed this up is to use CDB, so that instead of keeping cache in separate files, it's all in one, resulting in a *much* faster cache update. There are directions here: http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_speed_up_portage_with_cdb Interesting ... and thanks for the tip. I am concerned about all the warnings of breakage though. I need this on my server, which is my production firewall at the moment. I would hate to have this fail. A safer way is to update to a newer version of portage. In portage-2.1 the cache update code is rewritten and it is much faster then before (but maybe not as fast as CDB). The biggest reason for the slower update now compared to a year ago, is that the total number of packages in the tree have increased. The old code did not handle this very well. Since this is a server, you probably don't use kde. Excluding all kde split packages from the portage tree will speed things up a lot. Create an rsync exclude file and add RSYNC_EXCLUDE=path_to_file to your make.conf. Look in man pages for rsync for details. /Andreas -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:15:56 +0100 Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Well, you know, in worst case, portage doesn't work anymore. | In this case, you'd just have to revert your changes, and | everything's fine again. No, in the worst case Portage ends up with duff cache data, leading to utterly inappropriate packages being installed. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] What on Earth is Portage doing for so long?
On 3/17/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:15:56 +0100 Alexander Skwar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Well, you know, in worst case, portage doesn't work anymore. | In this case, you'd just have to revert your changes, and | everything's fine again. No, in the worst case Portage ends up with duff cache data, leading to utterly inappropriate packages being installed. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Hi, I've been using this cdb hack for so long I'd forgotten that it was there. If it is backed out is there a standard way to use portage these days that goes reasonably fast and doesn't have these risks. Granted, the risks are quite low, I think, but better not to take risks if not required to. Thanks, Mark -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
