port selfupdate incredibly slow

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

port selfupdate incredibly slow

Federico Calboli-2
Hi All,

I'd like to ask, is it just for me that sudo port -v selfupdate is very slow and CPU intensive?

My mac details: 2.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 8GB RAM, OS 10.7 (Lion), installed from scratch -- I made a bootable USB image and wiped my HD.

Cheers,

F

--
Federico Calboli
[hidden email]



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

ryandesign2
Administrator
On Aug 16, 2011, at 09:44, Federico Calboli wrote:

> I'd like to ask, is it just for me that sudo port -v selfupdate is very slow and CPU intensive?
>
> My mac details: 2.2 GHz Intel Core i7, 8GB RAM, OS 10.7 (Lion), installed from scratch -- I made a bootable USB image and wiped my HD.

"Selfupdate" syncs your ports tree, then builds a new version of MacPorts, if available.

Syncing the ports tree should not use hardly any CPU time at all; it should be limited by the speed of your network and your disk.

Building the new version of MacPorts will be CPU intensive for a minute or two.

If you're upgrading from MacPorts 1.x to MacPorts 2.x, then all existing installed ports must be converted. This can take hours depending on how many ports you have installed, but again should be bound by disk speed and not be CPU intensive.


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Federico Calboli-2
> If you're upgrading from MacPorts 1.x to MacPorts 2.x, then all existing installed ports must be converted. This can take hours depending on how many ports you have installed, but again should be bound by disk speed and not be CPU intensive

I should have mentioned, when I installed Lion I had to install MP 2.0.1 from the disk image, so all I see now is post fresh install of MP 2.0.1 from disk image.

Bw

F


>

--
Federico Calboli
[hidden email]



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

ryandesign2
Administrator

On Aug 17, 2011, at 04:59, Federico Calboli wrote:

>> If you're upgrading from MacPorts 1.x to MacPorts 2.x, then all existing installed ports must be converted. This can take hours depending on how many ports you have installed, but again should be bound by disk speed and not be CPU intensive
>
> I should have mentioned, when I installed Lion I had to install MP 2.0.1 from the disk image,

Correct, MacPorts 1.x was not compatible with Lion, if that's what you mean.

> so all I see now is post fresh install of MP 2.0.1 from disk image.

FYI, installing a MacPorts disk image over an existing MacPorts install would not uninstall any ports you had already installed.



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Federico Calboli-2
On 17 Aug 2011, at 11:19, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

>
> Correct, MacPorts 1.x was not compatible with Lion, if that's what you mean.
>
>> so all I see now is post fresh install of MP 2.0.1 from disk image.
>
> FYI, installing a MacPorts disk image over an existing MacPorts install would not uninstall any ports you had already installed.


As I wiped my disk and installed Lion from a bootable USB key I made with my copy of Lion (I did this to maximise performance), I had nothing in the way of MacPorts

All I am saying is, on the same machine the selfupdate step was much faster in SL. I would not know wy that is, but it is a very noticeable difference.

Bw

F


--
Federico Calboli
[hidden email]



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

ryandesign2
Administrator
On Aug 17, 2011, at 05:23, Federico Calboli wrote:

> On 17 Aug 2011, at 11:19, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> Correct, MacPorts 1.x was not compatible with Lion, if that's what you mean.
>>
>>> so all I see now is post fresh install of MP 2.0.1 from disk image.
>>
>> FYI, installing a MacPorts disk image over an existing MacPorts install would not uninstall any ports you had already installed.
>
> As I wiped my disk and installed Lion from a bootable USB key I made with my copy of Lion (I did this to maximise performance), I had nothing in the way of MacPorts

Ok.


> All I am saying is, on the same machine the selfupdate step was much faster in SL. I would not know wy that is, but it is a very noticeable difference.

What is selfupdate doing when it is slow? If you run verbosely (sudo port -v selfupdate), does it pause or slow down at a particular point?



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Federico Calboli-2

On 17 Aug 2011, at 11:25, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> As I wiped my disk and installed Lion from a bootable USB key I made with my copy of Lion (I did this to maximise performance), I had nothing in the way of MacPorts
>
> Ok.
>
>
>> All I am saying is, on the same machine the selfupdate step was much faster in SL. I would not know wy that is, but it is a very noticeable difference.
>
> What is selfupdate doing when it is slow? If you run verbosely (sudo port -v selfupdate), does it pause or slow down at a particular point?


It pauses for 30 seconds after

sent 64 bytes  received 636 bytes  280.00 bytes/sec
total size is 512  speedup is 0.73

As I said, in SL this delay at this stage was of a 5 seconds at most.

Bw

F


--
Federico Calboli
[hidden email]



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc
Hi,

Any update on this?

"port selfupdate" is still incredibly slow for no obvious reason.

Gili

Federico Calboli-2 wrote
On 17 Aug 2011, at 11:25, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> As I wiped my disk and installed Lion from a bootable USB key I made with my copy of Lion (I did this to maximise performance), I had nothing in the way of MacPorts
>
> Ok.
>
>
>> All I am saying is, on the same machine the selfupdate step was much faster in SL. I would not know wy that is, but it is a very noticeable difference.
>
> What is selfupdate doing when it is slow? If you run verbosely (sudo port -v selfupdate), does it pause or slow down at a particular point?


It pauses for 30 seconds after

sent 64 bytes  received 636 bytes  280.00 bytes/sec
total size is 512  speedup is 0.73

As I said, in SL this delay at this stage was of a 5 seconds at most.

Bw

F


--
Federico Calboli
[hidden email]



_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Frank Schima-3
Running in debug mode should show you where it is getting stuck.

port -d selfupdate


On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:52 AM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Any update on this?
>
> "port selfupdate" is still incredibly slow for no obvious reason.
>
> Gili
>
>
> Federico Calboli-2 wrote
>> On 17 Aug 2011, at 11:25, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>> As I wiped my disk and installed Lion from a bootable USB key I made
>>>> with my copy of Lion (I did this to maximise performance), I had nothing
>>>> in the way of MacPorts
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>>
>>>> All I am saying is, on the same machine the selfupdate step was much
>>>> faster in SL. I would not know wy that is, but it is a very noticeable
>>>> difference.
>>>
>>> What is selfupdate doing when it is slow? If you run verbosely (sudo port
>>> -v selfupdate), does it pause or slow down at a particular point?
>>
>>
>> It pauses for 30 seconds after
>>
>> sent 64 bytes  received 636 bytes  280.00 bytes/sec
>> total size is 512  speedup is 0.73
>>
>> As I said, in SL this delay at this stage was of a 5 seconds at most.
>>
>> Bw
>>
>> F
>>
>>
>> --
>> Federico Calboli
>
>> f.calboli@
>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> macports-users mailing list
>
>> macports-users@.macosforge
>
>> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p196936.html
> Sent from the MacPorts - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> macports-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users

_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc

    Here is what I see:

DEBUG: MacPorts sources location: <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs
--->  Updating MacPorts base sources using rsync
receiving file list ... done

sent 36 bytes  received 69 bytes  70.00 bytes/sec
total size is 3543040  speedup is 33743.24
receiving file list ... done

sent 36 bytes  received 76 bytes  74.67 bytes/sec
total size is 512  speedup is 4.57
DEBUG: successful verification with key <home>/build/intermediate/macports/share/macports/macports-pubkey.pem
DEBUG: /usr/bin/tar -C <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/tmp -xf <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/base.tar
MacPorts base version 2.1.2 installed,
DEBUG: Rebuilding and reinstalling MacPorts if needed
MacPorts base version 2.1.2 downloaded.
--->  Updating the ports tree
Synchronizing local ports tree from rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar
DEBUG: /usr/bin/rsync -rtzv --delete-after  rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs
receiving file list ... done

sent 36 bytes  received 70 bytes  70.67 bytes/sec
total size is 54538240  speedup is 514511.70
DEBUG: /usr/bin/rsync -rtzv --delete-after  rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar.rmd160 <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs
receiving file list ... done

sent 36 bytes  received 77 bytes  75.33 bytes/sec
total size is 512  speedup is 4.53
DEBUG: successful verification with key <home>/build/intermediate/macports/share/macports/macports-pubkey.pem
DEBUG: /usr/bin/tar -C <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/tmp -xf <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar

  This last line hangs for 25 seconds. Then I get:

Creating port index in /Users/builds/.jenkins/workspace/gstreamer_ios_snapshot/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports
Total number of ports parsed:	0 
Ports successfully parsed:	0 
Ports failed:			0 
Up-to-date ports skipped:	15858

--->  MacPorts base is already the latest version
DEBUG: Setting MacPorts sources ownership to builds
The ports tree has been updated. To upgrade your installed ports, you should run
  port upgrade outdated

	So the question is: why the 25 second hang? Network activity is virtually non-existent during this time.
Gili

  

On 15/10/2012 11:59 AM, Frank Schima-3 [via Mac OS Forge] wrote:
Running in debug mode should show you where it is getting stuck.

port -d selfupdate


On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:52 AM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Any update on this?
>
> "port selfupdate" is still incredibly slow for no obvious reason.
>
> Gili
>
>
> Federico Calboli-2 wrote
>> On 17 Aug 2011, at 11:25, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>> As I wiped my disk and installed Lion from a bootable USB key I made
>>>> with my copy of Lion (I did this to maximise performance), I had nothing
>>>> in the way of MacPorts
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>>
>>>> All I am saying is, on the same machine the selfupdate step was much
>>>> faster in SL. I would not know wy that is, but it is a very noticeable
>>>> difference.
>>>
>>> What is selfupdate doing when it is slow? If you run verbosely (sudo port
>>> -v selfupdate), does it pause or slow down at a particular point?
>>
>>
>> It pauses for 30 seconds after
>>
>> sent 64 bytes  received 636 bytes  280.00 bytes/sec
>> total size is 512  speedup is 0.73
>>
>> As I said, in SL this delay at this stage was of a 5 seconds at most.
>>
>> Bw
>>
>> F
>>
>>
>> --
>> Federico Calboli
>
>> f.calboli@
>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> macports-users mailing list
>
>> [hidden email]
>
>> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p196936.html
> Sent from the MacPorts - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> macports-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users

_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p196938.html
To unsubscribe from port selfupdate incredibly slow, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Brandon Allbery
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:56 PM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:
DEBUG: /usr/bin/tar -C <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/tmp
 
-xf <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar
 
This last line hangs for 25 seconds. Then I get:
That has nothing to do with the network; it's unpacking the downloaded port archive to local disk.  You might want to check whether you're running short on disk space or have a lot of other disk I/O going on at the time.

(I've found stuff like that to be intolerably slow on my big iMac of late, having run almost exclusively on an Air for the past year... SSDs have spoiled me rotten.)

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix/linux, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure          http://sinenomine.net


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc

    You're right. It's writing an awful lot of data. Why is that? 25 seconds times an average of 10MB/s (which is a conservative estimate)... it's writing out around 250MB.

Gili

On 15/10/2012 1:58 PM, Brandon Allbery [via Mac OS Forge] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 12:56 PM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:
DEBUG: /usr/bin/tar -C <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/tmp
 
-xf <home>/build/intermediate/macports/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar
 
This last line hangs for 25 seconds. Then I get:
That has nothing to do with the network; it's unpacking the downloaded port archive to local disk.  You might want to check whether you're running short on disk space or have a lot of other disk I/O going on at the time.

(I've found stuff like that to be intolerably slow on my big iMac of late, having run almost exclusively on an Air for the past year... SSDs have spoiled me rotten.)

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix/linux, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure          http://sinenomine.net


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p196952.html
To unsubscribe from port selfupdate incredibly slow, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Brandon Allbery
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:19 PM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:
    You're right. It's writing an awful lot of data. Why is that? 25 seconds times an average of 10MB/s (which is a conservative estimate)... it's writing out around 250MB.

I haven't updated this week yet, but:

-rw-r--r--  1 root  admin  54497280 Oct 10 21:31 /opt/local/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar

is what it's unpacking.  If your question is why it's that large, I cannot answer but I'm not very surprised by it.  (Note that this is not compressed.)

And you seem to have gotten stuck on this whole network red herring again, because if your local hard drive only does 10MB/s then you have far worse problems than MacPorts.  This is not doing ANY network I/O unless you (and yes, I mean you, not Apple and certainly not MacPorts) replaced your local hard drive with NAS; it is unpacking a (just downloaded) local file to the local disk, indeed to the very same directory.

(The command it's running is called "tar"; run "man tar" to see what it does.  While it has some ability to use the network, the command you cited is not using an rmt filespec.)

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix/linux, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure          http://sinenomine.net


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc
Brandon,

    It seems a bit silly to unpack a tar file every time I run "port selfupdate". If I run it multiple times in a row, shouldn't it notice very quickly that nothing has changed? Can't you use timestamps to speed this up?

Gili

On 15/10/2012 7:29 PM, Brandon Allbery [via Mac OS Forge] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:19 PM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:
    You're right. It's writing an awful lot of data. Why is that? 25 seconds times an average of 10MB/s (which is a conservative estimate)... it's writing out around 250MB.

I haven't updated this week yet, but:

-rw-r--r--  1 root  admin  54497280 Oct 10 21:31 /opt/local/var/macports/sources/rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar

is what it's unpacking.  If your question is why it's that large, I cannot answer but I'm not very surprised by it.  (Note that this is not compressed.)

And you seem to have gotten stuck on this whole network red herring again, because if your local hard drive only does 10MB/s then you have far worse problems than MacPorts.  This is not doing ANY network I/O unless you (and yes, I mean you, not Apple and certainly not MacPorts) replaced your local hard drive with NAS; it is unpacking a (just downloaded) local file to the local disk, indeed to the very same directory.

(The command it's running is called "tar"; run "man tar" to see what it does.  While it has some ability to use the network, the command you cited is not using an rmt filespec.)

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix/linux, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure          http://sinenomine.net


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p197005.html
To unsubscribe from port selfupdate incredibly slow, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Brandon Allbery
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:26 PM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:
    It seems a bit silly to unpack a tar file every time I run "port selfupdate". If I run it multiple times in a row, shouldn't it notice very quickly that nothing has changed? Can't you use timestamps to speed this up?

Not really, as I understand it.  But is your system really so massively overloaded, or are you really in such a hurry?  Shaving 25 seconds off of selfupdate doesn't seem like it's worth fighting over.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix/linux, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure          http://sinenomine.net


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc

    My system isn't overloaded. It's running inside a VM. I'm running a script inside an automated build system. The faster the build, the better. Twenty five seconds might seem short to you, but in the world of automated builds every second matters.

    As I mentioned before, there is an easy fix. Why not implement it? It could be as simple as this:

  1. Every time "port selfupdate" is run, store a timestamp of the current time ("touch lastupdated.marker")
  2. The next time "port selfupdate" is run, compare the last-modified time of the tar file against the timestamp in the marker file. If the tar file is older, there is no need to update; otherwise, unpack the tar file.

    What do you think?

Thanks,
Gili

On 15/10/2012 8:35 PM, Brandon Allbery [via Mac OS Forge] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:26 PM, cowwoc <[hidden email]> wrote:
    It seems a bit silly to unpack a tar file every time I run "port selfupdate". If I run it multiple times in a row, shouldn't it notice very quickly that nothing has changed? Can't you use timestamps to speed this up?

Not really, as I understand it.  But is your system really so massively overloaded, or are you really in such a hurry?  Shaving 25 seconds off of selfupdate doesn't seem like it's worth fighting over.

--
brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
[hidden email]                                  [hidden email]
unix/linux, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure          http://sinenomine.net


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p197007.html
To unsubscribe from port selfupdate incredibly slow, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

Jeremy Lavergne
>     My system isn't overloaded. It's running inside a VM. I'm running a script inside an automated build system. The faster the build, the better. Twenty five seconds might seem short to you, but in the world of automated builds every second matters.

In that case, why not rely on the BuildBots instead of replicating all their effort locally 30 minutes after the fact?

>     As I mentioned before, there is an easy fix. Why not implement it?

Um...

Just use subversion instead of the tarballs.

_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc

    I'm not sure I understand.

    I'm not trying to rebuild a MacPorts port. I am installing a bunch of ports (like autoconf, libffi, etc) and using them to build some other unrelated software. If you're proposing I check Macports and built it from source, that's not what I'm trying to do.

Gili

On 15/10/2012 10:43 PM, Jeremy Lavergne [via Mac OS Forge] wrote:
>     My system isn't overloaded. It's running inside a VM. I'm running a script inside an automated build system. The faster the build, the better. Twenty five seconds might seem short to you, but in the world of automated builds every second matters.

In that case, why not rely on the BuildBots instead of replicating all their effort locally 30 minutes after the fact?

>     As I mentioned before, there is an easy fix. Why not implement it?

Um...

Just use subversion instead of the tarballs.

_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p197018.html
To unsubscribe from port selfupdate incredibly slow, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

ryandesign2
Administrator
In reply to this post by cowwoc

On Oct 15, 2012, at 18:19, cowwoc wrote:

>     You're right. It's writing an awful lot of data. Why is that? 25 seconds times an average of 10MB/s (which is a conservative estimate)... it's writing out around 250MB.

That seems large to me. I haven't looked at the ports.tar file on the rsync server, but the ports.tar.gz you can get from our web site [1] is 21MB, it decompresses to a 123MB ports.tar file, which extracts to 149MB of files. So the ports.tar you got seems to be twice as large as it should be?


[1] https://trac.macports.org/wiki/howto/PortTreeTarball


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: port selfupdate incredibly slow

cowwoc

    I was estimating. I just checked ports.tar and it's 54MB. But again, the point is you could compare the timestamp of a marker file to last-modified timestamp of the tar and the comparison would be instantaneous.

Gili

On 16/10/2012 9:05 AM, Ryan Schmidt-24 [via Mac OS Forge] wrote:

On Oct 15, 2012, at 18:19, cowwoc wrote:

>     You're right. It's writing an awful lot of data. Why is that? 25 seconds times an average of 10MB/s (which is a conservative estimate)... it's writing out around 250MB.

That seems large to me. I haven't looked at the ports.tar file on the rsync server, but the ports.tar.gz you can get from our web site [1] is 21MB, it decompresses to a 123MB ports.tar file, which extracts to 149MB of files. So the ports.tar you got seems to be twice as large as it should be?


[1] https://trac.macports.org/wiki/howto/PortTreeTarball


_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://mac-os-forge.2317878.n4.nabble.com/port-selfupdate-incredibly-slow-tp117503p197044.html
To unsubscribe from port selfupdate incredibly slow, click here.
NAML

12