Hi Balint, Thank you for looking into this.
Running "time strace -f -c unattended-upgrade --debug --verbose" it became obvious that unattended-upgrade was going through ALL the experimental packages in order to, in the end, ignore them (priority), causing a significant delay. Disabling experimental from my sources: I don't have the time to let it go all the way through yet, but the number of stat calls and errors is still significant. And a lot of time appears to be spent "recursively adjusting dependencies", e.g., falling back to adjusting asymptote's dependencies recursively falling back to adjusting asymptote-doc's dependencies recursively falling back to adjusting binutils's dependencies recursively falling back to adjusting binutils-common's dependencies recursively falling back to adjusting binutils-x86-64-linux-gnu's dependencies recursively falling back to adjusting cpp-9's dependencies recursively etc. Note this may very well be expected behavior. That I can't tell. Best regards, -Pascal -- Homepage (http://pascal.giard.info) École de technologie supérieure (http://etsmtl.ca) On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 8:39 AM Bálint Réczey <[email protected]> wrote: > Control -1 moreinfo > > Hi Pascal, > > I tried to reproduce the issue in an lxc container, but did not > observe a lot of stat calls: > > root@sid-uu:~# dpkg -i hello_2.10-1+deb9u1_amd64.deb > dpkg: warning: downgrading hello from 2.10-2 to 2.10-1+deb9u1 > (Reading database ... 15204 files and directories currently installed.) > Preparing to unpack hello_2.10-1+deb9u1_amd64.deb ... > Unpacking hello (2.10-1+deb9u1) over (2.10-2) ... > Setting up hello (2.10-1+deb9u1) ... > root@sid-uu:~# time strace -f -c unattended-upgrade --debug --verbose > strace: Process 7208 attached > ... > All upgrades installed > InstCount=0 DelCount=0 BrokenCount=0 > Extracting content from > /var/log/unattended-upgrades/unattended-upgrades-dpkg.log since > 2019-10-10 12:32:00 > % time seconds usecs/call calls errors syscall > ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ---------------- > 66.25 0.877182 2587 339 1 wait4 > 12.31 0.162923 2201 74 24 poll > 3.54 0.046883 919 51 link > 3.15 0.041677 11 3506 240 read > 2.91 0.038556 488 79 fsync > ... > > Could you please add some more detailed reproduction steps? > What release do you use, for example? > > Cheers, > Balint > > Pascal Giard <[email protected]> ezt írta (időpont: 2019. okt. 10., Cs, > 4:18): > > > > Dear maintainer, > > > > Recently unattended-upgrades started to consume a LOT more CPU time than > before. > > > > Similarly to the original report, I looked at what strace gets in terms > of statistics, here it is: > > strace: Process 5193 detached > > % time seconds usecs/call calls errors syscall > > ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ---------------- > > 100,00 4,762247 2 2288315 1703451 stat > > 0,00 0,000051 0 100 read > > 0,00 0,000015 0 20 openat > > 0,00 0,000008 0 20 close > > 0,00 0,000005 0 20 fstat > > 0,00 0,000005 0 20 fcntl > > ------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ---------------- > > 100.00 4,762331 2288495 1703451 total > > > > Looks odd, no? > > > > It is so bothering that for now I've disabled unattended-upgrades on all > 3 laptops. Manual update + upgrade requires a fraction of the resources > currently required by unattended-upgrades. > > > > I hope this issue gets sorted out. Please let me know if there's > something else I can do to provide useful information. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Pascal > > -- > > Homepage (http://pascal.giard.info) > > École de technologie supérieure (http://etsmtl.ca) > > > > >
