On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 21:54 -0500, Genes MailLists wrote: > I happened upon pacman on Arch linux - and it appeared to be > substantially faster than yum. Now this was casual "visual impact only" > - no formal tests using similar packages and same computer etc - but it > was very much noticeably faster. > > Installs of even large packages seemed to fly compared to what I was > used to from yum. > > Of course it could be difference in systems, or xz compression versus > presto or who knows what else ... but it leads me to ask ... > > Are there any good performance benchmarks comparing yum with pacman > and apt etc? ---- apt seems faster than yum but it seems that it is colored by the fact that a typical Fedora/RHEL/CentOS install will have a lot more packages installed than Debian/Ubuntu and it's perceptual, not that I have ever timed it. I do have a kitchen sink Ubuntu box at my work and it has a boatload of packages installed and it did seem to take some time to update. Then again, I tend to not use GUI updates and prefer using a virtual console where I can invoke the updates and switch to something else rather than watch the water come to a boil. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
