Am 11.01.2016 um 17:33 schrieb Neal Gompa:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Am 11.01.2016 um 17:26 schrieb Kalev Lember:On 01/11/2016 03:46 PM, Jan Kurik wrote:= Proposed System Wide Change: Change Proposal Name NewRpmDBFormat = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NewRpmDBFormat Change owner(s): * Florian Festi < ffesti AT redhat DOT com > Change format of the RPM Database from Berkeley DB to RPM's own format. == Detailed Description == The current implementation of the RPM Database is based on Berkeley DB. There are doubts about the its future and level of maintenance. In addition rpm's use of the database has multiple issues on its own. As a result RPM upstream is working to replace the database format with a new implementation.Is the new database going to be able to support yumdb use cases as well? Might be a good time to get rid of separate rpmdb and yumdb and merge them together.please don't do that the yumdb is bloat because it contains a endless history and that's growing on machines after 10, 20 or more dist-upgrades while currently it's easy to get rid of that bload by just rm -rf /var/lib/yum/* and/or rm -rf /var/lib/dnf/*If they were merged, I suspect they'd add a command for cleaning up history that you could use
i also would have suspected that dnf and it's "lowlevel" libraries are using librpm and looking at that thread libsolv is accessing the database directly
as well i would have suspected that /var/lib/yum/ get some cleanup until i had enough by "locate fc12" find a ton of files with the history of all updates from intsrducing the yumdb on a F15 system
so i don't give anything about "suspect"
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
