On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:19 +1200, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Michael Stone <michael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm sure there are easier things to prune than yum itself. > > Perhaps you are right. I was probably expressing my own worries about > yum memory usage on the XO :-) > > In a 30s unscientific test yum does seem to consume a fair bit of RAM > while RPM runs. The F9 machine I use for dev/build purposes had 9 > updates to apply. > > I just did `yum -yt update` while running repeatedly `ps_mem.py | > grep yum ` (in hindsight, I should have grepped for rpm as well). It > quickly ramped up to 44.9 MiB private + 1.5 MiB shared during the > Resolving Dependencies stage, and stayed there for the duration. While > rpm was running, yum was _still_ sitting on thos 46MiB. What arch? How many repos. did you have enabled? In my tests the latest yum does a "large" update in about 40MB RSS, a few packages is much more likely to be in the 25-30MB range (VSZ is higher, but is just unpaged stuff, not actual swap). > It looks like it has the whole package metadata in a memory structure. > Perhaps it's needed for the plugins, though I hope the internal APIs > don't require that all that stuff is in memory. We drop all the cached data from within yum when the depsolving is finished, however we have little control of how much of that is then usable by rpm to do the transaction (that'd be mostly upto python and libc). We also have plans to split transactions, but I'm not sure you should rely on that to significantly drop the memory usage requirements (although it will make the failure case much nicer). -- James Antill <james.antill@xxxxxxxxxx> Red Hat
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
