On Mittwoch, 3. April 2013, 11:37:54 wrote Claudio Freire:
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Adrian Schröter
wrote: On Mittwoch, 3. April 2013, 10:54:17 wrote Claudio Freire:
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Adrian Schröter
wrote: I'd like to use 'aggregate' for hundreds of packages, but the performance of aggregating seems poor. scheduler seems stopped working for a minutes.
I found that the 'aggregate' actually copies all the packages built from aggregated packages to new package repo. It took a time if hundreds of packages to be aggregated.
So, my question is that how I can improve the performance of aggregating, if it is possible to replace with link instead of copy?
No, because it needs also to be re-signed, so it is not the same binary.
Still, it must be faster than linking packages (and thus rebuilding them) mustn't it?
I do not get you here, what do you compare?
Aggregate vs link. I see the possible confusion with symlinks. I mean package links. Not sure why I brought links up.
Anyway, the point was that aggregates copy build results, so they skip the building phase. So it must be faster, even though it has to re-sign, than linking, which involves re-building (and re-signing).
He had a hard link on disk in mind when he spoke about linking, not about OBS source links ...
So, whereas the performance of the signer could be improved perhaps, aggregating itself doesn't seem like an optimization candidate. The fact that it takes minutes for hundreds of packages might not be bad per-se. Depends on how many minutes and how many hundreds, and whether it's performing more poorly than the corresponding signing phase of linked packages (it shouldn't, that would be a bug).
-- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+owner@opensuse.org