Re: DNF and PackageKit background data usage

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




----- Original Message -----
> > On 30 October 2016 at 01:26, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > 1) Both dnf and GNOME Software / PackageKit default to performing
> > > fairly data-hungry transactions in the background, out of the box,
> > > without telling you about it. GNOME's is particularly bad, as it will
> > > happily download available updates in the background, which can be
> > > gigabytes worth of data.
> > 
> > If you're on an "unmetered" connection type...
> 
> This can be problematic even on an unmetered connection. An anecdotal
> experience: A few months back I was on a hotel wifi, I vitally needed some
> information quick, and the wifi simply didn't work - all web pages timed
> out. I was very disgruntled about a crappy hotel wifi (that used to work the
> day before), when in 5-10 minutes, I saw "Your updates were downloaded and
> are ready to install" popup. Then I realized... tried the web browser and
> web pages loaded normally. The wifi connection was so slow that while
> PackageKit was downloading updates in the background, I couldn't access the
> web at all.
> 
> My poor experience stemmed from:
> a) not being informed that updates were being downloaded in the background -
> so I assumed the problem was elsewhere
> b) not being able to pause/abort background downloads - even if I had
> realized/figured out PackageKit was hogging the network, there'd have been
> no way to stop the downloads (certainly no user accessible one, and even
> when I tried to kill the process some time in the past, it just kept
> respawning)
> 
> You can disregard this as a "slow hotel wifi problem only", but I live in a
> block of flats, the air is jammed with 20-30 wifi networks all around me,
> and I experience a similar situation (though not that severe) from time to
> time even at my home, a few meters from the AP - one full speed download can
> completely kill any other (my own) network traffic. Again, this would not be
> a problem if I a) knew about it b) could stop it.

I'd really like the kernel to do QoS on the user's own connections. We can know
whether downloads are interactive or not, so there is metadata available
to make this better, and not cripple interactive downloads while background
downloads are ongoing.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux