Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-16 Thread Kai Henningsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory S. Stark) wrote on 15.04.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Opening files in a large directory can be extremely inefficient in many Unix > varieties. The kernel has to do a linear search for each the file. Linux 2.1 > should be faster because of the dentry stuff, but even so

Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-16 Thread Ian Jackson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes ("Re: dpkg memory usage"): ... > I've written a Regina REXX program to run some comparisons > between the dpkg/status file and current Packages (+non-free, > contrib, nonus) files. It currently shows which files need > updating, misconfigu

Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-16 Thread rick
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > ... > I also intend to change the format of the /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.list > database to make it faster to load, and I may change > /var/lib/dpkg/status too. (The resulting structures will still be > editable with emacs.) I've written a Regina REXX progr

Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-16 Thread Gregory S. Stark
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On `small memory' systems dpkg switches to a different data structure > which is about twice as slow for general access on a big machine, but > has a much smaller working set so is much faster for setup and access > on small machines. dpkg uses sysinfo(2)

Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-15 Thread Steve Dunham
d rewrite the whole database after every update. Ok, I'll concede this on the atomic and error handling points. I didn't know that dpkg was designed that robustly. I guess a libdpkg would fix the startup time issues and if I want "dpkg -S" to work faster, I can always write

Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-15 Thread Ian Jackson
Steve Dunham writes ("Re: dpkg memory usage"): > John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I was upgrading packages on my 64 meg system today ant noticed: > > PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT LIB %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND > > 24785 root 1

Re: dpkg memory usage

1998-04-11 Thread Steve Dunham
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I was upgrading packages on my 64 meg system today ant noticed: > PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT LIB %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND > 24785 root 18 0 12680 12M 568 S 0 0.1 20.0 5:36 dpkg > Yes, that's almost 13 megs used by d

dpkg memory usage

1998-04-11 Thread John Goerzen
I was upgrading packages on my 64 meg system today ant noticed: PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT LIB %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND 24785 root 18 0 12680 12M 568 S 0 0.1 20.0 5:36 dpkg Yes, that's almost 13 megs used by dpkg, and 20% of my RAM. That also is 4 megs more