Pacman evolution

toofishes · 2008-01-19 01:52:34

ekerazha wrote:

phrakture wrote:
Let's stop arguing... this is dumb. If we're all "so busy" let's go be busy elsewhere where we're not broaching topics that have been touched on throughout my entire stay with ArchLinux and people have still to do anything about
Please reply to this (if you want):
SQLite: SELECT * FROM foo_bar WHERE group = 'gnome'
Do you think this is slower than the current <scan dirs on filesystem, then parse every text file and look if the group is 'gnome'> ?
People will "do" when the things to "do" will be understood and accepted, people won't waste their time vainly.

Yes its faster. But does it matter all that much?

$ time pacman -Qg gnome > /dev/null

real    0m0.105s
user    0m0.047s
sys    0m0.037s

$ time pacman -Sg gnome > /dev/null

real    0m0.388s
user    0m0.160s
sys    0m0.203s

And that is time to load up everything else as well- opening pacman.conf, initializing the library, and everything else. I didn't know utilizing the kernel cache was against the law.

Here are the things to "do" since you don't seem to understand we are "busy" developing "software" that works and doesn't "break" people's systems in the "name" of speed.

http://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?project=3

Now please go develop this and stop wasting my time (and that of my other very competent pacman developers). I'll stick with my tar-db idea that will work and still preserve the simplicity of a flat file system, but reap the benefits of being in a single file to reduce all the inode lookups.

phrakture · 2008-01-19 02:00:18

I am psychic. I can see this thread will get out of hand fast. Call me biased if you will, but I'm gonna lock this because it's just dumb to argue about this until you show me some code.

Arch Linux

#51 2008-01-19 01:52:34

Re: Pacman evolution

#52 2008-01-19 02:00:18

Re: Pacman evolution

Board footer