On 2021-Apr-11 14:27:27 +0200, Helge Oldach <free...@oldach.net> wrote: >Peter Jeremy via freebsd-ports wrote on Sun, 11 Apr 2021 00:52:11 +0200 (CEST): >> Following the SVN to GIT migration, portsnap is now the only practical >> way to use ports on a low-memory system. I've done some experiments >> and standard git has a 2GB working set to checkout a ports tree. > >However checking out is a one-time action with ports as there is only >one branch (switching frequently between main and quarterly is probably >not very sensible on a limited machine). git pull is significantly more >lightweight, I've just seen some 200M RSS. That should work well even on >a 512M machine. Probably much better than gitup in constrained memory?
Except that git will arbitrarily and randomly decide that it needs to run "gc" - which is similarly extravagant in memory usage. Last time I found one running, it thrashed that poor VM for 3 days. Ignoring that, a "git up -ff" on a ports tree peaks with 2×1GB processes, though it looks like the working set size might only be ~350MB. -- Peter Jeremy
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
