On 11 July 2017 at 16:48, Florian Weimer <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * Stephen John Smoogen: > >> On 11 July 2017 at 07:52, Michael Schroeder <mls@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:41:05AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >>>> And we do use SQLite today in DNF with the yumdb, as well as the new >>>> SWDB coming soon(TM). I'm not sure why the SQLite backend was removed >>>> in rpm 4.9.0, but maybe it should be revisited for rpm 4.14. >>> >>> AFAIR it was removed because it was unbearable slow, nobody used it, >>> and nobody wanted to maintain it. >>> >> >> 1. It was very slow.. and developers complained a lot about how long >> it took to get various things done. > > It looks like the backend was ported from SQLite 2 code initially. > The result set processing code indeed loks quite inefficient (result > set cells are are allocated individually, memcpy is used to copy an > int, and so on). But I'm still surprised this was observable to > users. Never doubt the amount a developer will complain when either an install or build takes longer than it did before. Especially when they have to do dozens or hundreds of builds. And also never doubt how much complaining if they find that rpm/yum is now using up more memory. [There were memory issues in yum which I think went back to this.] Or if someone uses that speed and memory usage to explain why apt/.deb is superior to yum/.rpm. Those kinds of complaints end up getting features yanked. I do believe the extra memory did cause OOM on certain scenarios which was another reason for it to be removed. However it has been a while so I could be remembering 10 other bugs. -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
