On 21-09-2022 03:11, Tommy Nguyen wrote:
On Wed, 2022-09-21 at 02:53 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Tommy Nguyen wrote:
DNF5 is ridiculously fast.
It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters
(elapsed wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking
30% less time.
That said, there are other features of DNF5 (no more Python,
shared cache between PackageKit and CLI) that are IMHO even more
interesting than the raw speed gain.
Would you have preferred if I used a different superlative? I still
consider 30% less to be significant, especially because DNF5
processes metadata in parallel which makes things seem faster,
whether perceived or real. And yes, the other improvements are good
as well, but end users focus on speed. See: constant discussions
about how to make DNF4 faster (including enabling fastestmirror which
can make things slower) or perception that it is slower because it
processes metadata at a different stage than apt for example.
As of recent, memory usage might be of a larger concern. Of which your
data shows a very welcome 40% reduction. I'll gladly take the speed
improvement as a bonus.
Having followed the discussion, the challenging part will be the
adaptation of all dependent packages to DNF5. I'll leave it to others to
coin terms and attributes for the new DNF5.
-- Sandro
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
