Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Neal Gompa
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 09.10.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Orion Poplawski: > >> On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> >>> >>> From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata >>> pulled down so DNF can

Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Kevin Kofler
Orion Poplawski wrote: > Perhaps every product should produce a os/{repodata,Packages} directory as > well as an updates/VERSION/PRODUCT/ tree with . Please no! Let's not fragment Fedora even more than it already is with those "products". * Would packages belonging to multiple products (kernel,

Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Orion Poplawski
On 10/09/2015 05:20 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Orion Poplawski wrote: Perhaps every product should produce a os/{repodata,Packages} directory as well as an updates/VERSION/PRODUCT/ tree with . Please no! Let's not fragment Fedora even more than it already is with those "products". * Would

Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 09.10.2015 um 21:41 schrieb Orion Poplawski: On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice

Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 10.10.2015 um 01:59 schrieb Neal Gompa: On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Reindl Harald

Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Matthew Miller
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 01:41:15PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata > > pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire > > (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice to not have > > that

Re: repodata size

2015-10-09 Thread Orion Poplawski
On 10/08/2015 01:08 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > From an unrelated practical point of view: consider that the metadata > pulled down so DNF can operate is basically the same size as the entire > (compressed) Fedora Cloud Base image. It'd be very nice to not have > that overhead (but still have

filelists vs primary repodata size - provides/requires creep?

2013-09-11 Thread Orion Poplawski
I remember once upon a time folks being concerned about file requires forcing the download of the filelist metadata because was so big. This is still an issue, however I note that for current x86_64 rawhide: 27M Sep 11 06:11 *-filelists.sqlite.bz2 18M Sep 11 06:12 *-primary.sqlite.bz2