Hey folks! I apologize for the wide distribution, but this seemed like a bug it'd be appropriate to get a wide range of input on.
There's a bug that was proposed as an F37 Beta blocker: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907030
it's quite an old bug, but up until recently, the summary was apparently accurate - dnf would run out of memory with 512M of RAM, but was OK with 1G. However, as of quite recently, on F36 at least (not sure if anyone's explicitly tested F37), dnf operations are commonly failing on VMs/containers with 1G of RAM due to running out of RAM and getting OOM-killed.
There's some discussion in the bug about what might be causing this and potential ways to resolve it, and please do dig into/contribute to that if you can, but the other question here I guess is: how much do we care about this? How bad is it that you can't reliably run dnf operations on top of a minimal Fedora environment with 1G of RAM?
This obviously has some overlap with our stated hardware requirements, so here they are for the record:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/release-notes/welcome/Har...
that specifies 2GB as the minimum memory for "the default installation", by which I think it's referring to a default Workstation install, though this should be clarified. But then there's a "Low memory installations" boxout, which suggests that "users with less than 768MB of system memory may have better results performing a minimal install and adding to it afterward", which kinda is recommending that people do exactly the thing that doesn't work (do a minimal install then use dnf on it), and implying it'll work.
After some consideration I don't think it makes sense to take this bug as an F37 blocker, since it already affects F36, and that's what I'll be suggesting at the next blocker review meeting. However, it does seem a perfect candidate for prioritized bug status, and I've nominated it for that.
I guess if folks can chime in with thoughts here and/or in the bug report, maybe a consensus will emerge on just how big of an issue this is (and how likely it is to get fixed). There will presumably be a FESCo ticket related to prioritized bug status too.
Thanks folks!
What is the contents of /etc/dnf/dnf.conf It might help to see if there is a setting therein that is causing the mentioned issue.
Regards Leslie Leslie Satenstein Montréal Québec, Canada
On Sunday, August 28, 2022 at 11:24:30 p.m. EDT, Adam Williamson adamwill@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hey folks! I apologize for the wide distribution, but this seemed like a bug it'd be appropriate to get a wide range of input on.
There's a bug that was proposed as an F37 Beta blocker: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907030
it's quite an old bug, but up until recently, the summary was apparently accurate - dnf would run out of memory with 512M of RAM, but was OK with 1G. However, as of quite recently, on F36 at least (not sure if anyone's explicitly tested F37), dnf operations are commonly failing on VMs/containers with 1G of RAM due to running out of RAM and getting OOM-killed.
There's some discussion in the bug about what might be causing this and potential ways to resolve it, and please do dig into/contribute to that if you can, but the other question here I guess is: how much do we care about this? How bad is it that you can't reliably run dnf operations on top of a minimal Fedora environment with 1G of RAM?
This obviously has some overlap with our stated hardware requirements, so here they are for the record:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/release-notes/welcome/Har...
that specifies 2GB as the minimum memory for "the default installation", by which I think it's referring to a default Workstation install, though this should be clarified. But then there's a "Low memory installations" boxout, which suggests that "users with less than 768MB of system memory may have better results performing a minimal install and adding to it afterward", which kinda is recommending that people do exactly the thing that doesn't work (do a minimal install then use dnf on it), and implying it'll work.
After some consideration I don't think it makes sense to take this bug as an F37 blocker, since it already affects F36, and that's what I'll be suggesting at the next blocker review meeting. However, it does seem a perfect candidate for prioritized bug status, and I've nominated it for that.
I guess if folks can chime in with thoughts here and/or in the bug report, maybe a consensus will emerge on just how big of an issue this is (and how likely it is to get fixed). There will presumably be a FESCo ticket related to prioritized bug status too.
Thanks folks!
On 29 Aug 2022, at 04:25, Adam Williamson adamwill@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Hey folks! I apologize for the wide distribution, but this seemed like a bug it'd be appropriate to get a wide range of input on.
There's a bug that was proposed as an F37 Beta blocker: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907030
it's quite an old bug, but up until recently, the summary was apparently accurate - dnf would run out of memory with 512M of RAM, but was OK with 1G. However, as of quite recently, on F36 at least (not sure if anyone's explicitly tested F37), dnf operations are commonly failing on VMs/containers with 1G of RAM due to running out of RAM and getting OOM-killed.
There's some discussion in the bug about what might be causing this and potential ways to resolve it, and please do dig into/contribute to that if you can, but the other question here I guess is: how much do we care about this? How bad is it that you can't reliably run dnf operations on top of a minimal Fedora environment with 1G of RAM?
This obviously has some overlap with our stated hardware requirements, so here they are for the record:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/release-notes/welcome/Har...
that specifies 2GB as the minimum memory for "the default installation", by which I think it's referring to a default Workstation install, though this should be clarified. But then there's a "Low memory installations" boxout, which suggests that "users with less than 768MB of system memory may have better results performing a minimal install and adding to it afterward", which kinda is recommending that people do exactly the thing that doesn't work (do a minimal install then use dnf on it), and implying it'll work.
I have seen dnf fail to work on my 2GiB Rpi 4 with f36. What I did to workaround this was install the kernel on its own, then dnf update the rest.
So it’s only 1GiB systems that are effected.
I also have a 1GiB digital ocean VM that happens to not see this issue.
I suspect it may be certain packages that make this more likely to fail.
Barry
After some consideration I don't think it makes sense to take this bug as an F37 blocker, since it already affects F36, and that's what I'll be suggesting at the next blocker review meeting. However, it does seem a perfect candidate for prioritized bug status, and I've nominated it for that.
I guess if folks can chime in with thoughts here and/or in the bug report, maybe a consensus will emerge on just how big of an issue this is (and how likely it is to get fixed). There will presumably be a FESCo ticket related to prioritized bug status too.
Thanks folks!
Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
-
Adam Williamson -
Barry -
Leslie S Satenstein