rawhide report: 20050405 changes

Kyrre Ness Sjobak kyrre at solution-forge.net
Tue Apr 5 19:20:12 UTC 2005


tir, 05.04.2005 kl. 17.35 skrev seth vidal:
> >   Is that worth adding yet another XML Parser package to the distribution
> > used by a single tool ? Is there a compatibility layer to still use
> > libxml2 ? 
> >   If I remember correctly, the performance problem wasn't libxml2 itself
> > but the specific usage within yum, i.e. collecting the data, libxml2 by
> > itself is parsing the megabyte sized file in less than a tenth of a second.
> > I'm surprized the solution ends up going to use a python specific library
> > instead of trying to find why the interface between libxml2 and yum generated
> > that problem. I don't remember you saying you would switch library as a result.
> 
> well what happened was this:
>  Icon was working on repoview and decided to try out CelementTree b/c he
> was using kid anyway and it used it. After some preliminary tests it
> showed up as significantly faster parsing the metadata. For
> primary.xml.gz the times went from 21s for 1800ish pkgs to 7s. Then when
> he switched it to use iterparse() the memory footprint dropped below 10M
> for the whole parse.
> 
wow. That's just... amazing!

Anyway: How large are the package in question? After all, yum is a
pretty "core" package. It's not some obscure fringe thingy. So adding
*one* package to support it can't be all that bad?

After all, didn't OOo (another non-fringe package) pretty much cause
Java to be included?

Great job getting that much more speed out of yum! A great program
getting better :)

Kyrre




More information about the devel mailing list