You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
[SOLVED]Pacman very slow to sync local and repository
What happened? When did pacman get this friggin' fast with updating. I don't even need to do the "pacman cage" script anymore.
- Thanks, and hopefully I won't be punished for asking this .
Last edited by algorythm (2010-01-14 19:20:47)
“Talent you can bloom. Instinct you can polish.” — Haikyuu!! (adapted)
“If everybody thought alike, no one would be thinking very much.” — Walter Lippmann (adapted)
“The important thing is to be able, at any moment, to sacrifice what we are for what we could become.” — Charles Dubois
Offline
Did speed improve in pacman? Pacman hasn't been updated since 2009-11-14.
I'm confused, why did you post those two links?
I considered uninstalling pacman-cage so I would have fewer packages installed, but I decided not to because it is just so stinkin fast.
Last edited by drcouzelis (2010-01-14 19:53:45)
Offline
I guess I was pretty confusing. I mean you don't need to use the pacman cage (as far as my testing with just installed arch 64-bit proved) because updating is so fast anyway.
“Talent you can bloom. Instinct you can polish.” — Haikyuu!! (adapted)
“If everybody thought alike, no one would be thinking very much.” — Walter Lippmann (adapted)
“The important thing is to be able, at any moment, to sacrifice what we are for what we could become.” — Charles Dubois
Offline
I guess I was pretty confusing. I mean you don't need to use the pacman cage (as far as my testing with just installed arch 64-bit proved) because updating is so fast anyway.
It's always fast when you first install Arch, but degrades over time, then you have to do a whole re-install
Offline
It's always fast when you first install Arch, but degrades over time, then you have to do a whole re-install
SHHH! Don't say the "R" word! These are the Arch Linux forums!
Offline
It will only slow down because of the cache and the type of filesystem used. They make all the difference.
I've never experienced slow pacman, I rarely clear the cache and I've never used pacman-cage.
Last edited by sand_man (2010-01-14 21:47:42)
Offline
K, then. That's what I figured out but I red on the "Pacman very slow" topic that pacman is slow because it has to check so many individual text files in /var/*. I mean PKGBUILDs (and the other install configs).
Last edited by algorythm (2010-01-15 12:27:52)
“Talent you can bloom. Instinct you can polish.” — Haikyuu!! (adapted)
“If everybody thought alike, no one would be thinking very much.” — Walter Lippmann (adapted)
“The important thing is to be able, at any moment, to sacrifice what we are for what we could become.” — Charles Dubois
Offline
There's also pacman-optimize command to speed up when cache gets fragmented.
Offline
There's also pacman-optimize command to speed up when cache gets fragmented.
Yes I know but that wasn't what I was asking.
“Talent you can bloom. Instinct you can polish.” — Haikyuu!! (adapted)
“If everybody thought alike, no one would be thinking very much.” — Walter Lippmann (adapted)
“The important thing is to be able, at any moment, to sacrifice what we are for what we could become.” — Charles Dubois
Offline
K, then. That's what I figured out but I red on the "Pacman very slow" topic that pacman is slow because it has to check so many individual text files in /var/*. I mean PKGBUILDs (and the other install configs).
Yes that's right but the slowness comes from the type of fs or the fs config. I've always had /var as reiserfs
Offline
It will only slow down because of the cache and the type of filesystem used. They make all the difference.
I've never experienced slow pacman, I rarely clear the cache and I've never used pacman-cage.
Yes that's right but the slowness comes from the type of fs or the fs config. I've always had /var as reiserfs
I see. You've setup a fast filesystem yourself for pacman to use, whereas I had pacman-cage setup a little filesystem for pacman to use. I had no idea the filesystem type made that much of a difference. It sure does make a difference!
Putting /var on a filesystem that is good at handling lots of small files really quickly sounds like a great idea. Aside from reiserfs, do you have any suggestions?
Offline
algorythm wrote:K, then. That's what I figured out but I red on the "Pacman very slow" topic that pacman is slow because it has to check so many individual text files in /var/*. I mean PKGBUILDs (and the other install configs).
Yes that's right but the slowness comes from the type of fs or the fs config. I've always had /var as reiserfs
Yup same here! Reiser is good for handling small files.
Offline
For a while after ext4 went stable, the first sync after bootup - when the disk cache wasn't populated yet - would be very slow. It became fast again when I upgraded to 2.6.31.
Offline
Yes, I know that ReiserFS/Reiser4 are designed to be very good with small files and also the suggestion by someone on the same topic was to have 'pacman-sqlite' (so that the /var/* directory would just be a sqlite database) as sqlite dbs are faster. The solutions now are the pacman cage or /var with fs that's fast with small files.
Anyways I thought Reiser 4 was stable already? It's even gonna (at least if 'everything goes well') enter mainline around 2.6.36.
“Talent you can bloom. Instinct you can polish.” — Haikyuu!! (adapted)
“If everybody thought alike, no one would be thinking very much.” — Walter Lippmann (adapted)
“The important thing is to be able, at any moment, to sacrifice what we are for what we could become.” — Charles Dubois
Offline
Pages: 1