On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 04:12:23AM -0000, Eric Hammond wrote: > FYI, the reason I did not include the apt package index in the original > Ubuntu AMIs on EC2 was because: > > - it increased the size of the AMI by 40%, > > - there is a strong correlation between the AMI size and load time > (pending to running), and > > - users should almost always "apt-get update" before upgrading or > installing packages. > > On my Hardy ami-c4f615ad, disk usage goes from 393 MB to 553 MB with > "apt-get update" (increase of 160 MB or 41%).
Something else must be going on here. The package list is simply not that large. > On the Karmic ami-1515f67c, disk usage goes from 548 MB to 576 MB with > "apt-get update (increase of 28 MB or 5%) so it is not as big of a deal. > > On the other hand, perhaps this is an indication of extra files left on the > new Karmic images which might not be needed and which could be removed to > speed up their startup time on EC2. Here's a couple sets of files for > consideration with sizes on a fresh Karmic instance: > 13M /var/cache/apt/pkgcache.bin > 34M /var/lib/apt/lists Those numbers look more realistic. -- - mdz -- ec2/uec images should have complete apt package lists https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513060 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
