On Ter, 2016-04-19 at 10:53 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:20:51 +0100 > Sérgio Basto <sergio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Seg, 2016-04-18 at 23:54 +0300, Alexander Ploumistos wrote: > > > > > > It's been a little over two hours since I started fedora-review > > > and > > > it seems I'm hitting these two bugs: > > > * dnf repoquery --resolve is extremely slow #1279538 > > I already change priority and severity of #1279538 to urgent > Just as a side note, I don't know anyone who actually uses or cares > about these fields in Fedora land. we need it for fedora-review > IMHO you are much better off just > explaining why the bug is important or what it blocks. because is a dnf bug , that is not acceptable , IMHO . time dnf repoquery -q -C --requires glibc (...) real 0m1.335s user 0m1.084s sys 0m0.110s time dnf repoquery -q -C --requires --resolve glibc (...) real 4m24.474s user 4m22.064s sys 0m2.130s with CPU usage in 100% ! > kevin > > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject. > org -- Sérgio M. B. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
