Rawhide yum-update eats ~1.2GB of memory.

[Gilboa Davara]

On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 09:46 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 16:36 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 08:34 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 11:00 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > > 
> > > > B9 updated to latest running on a VMWare virtual machine with 1GB RAM +
> > > > 512MB swap.
> > > > Running yum update dies on 
> > > > Updating: glib2 ...
> > > > error: Couldn't fork %post: Cannot allocate memory.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Okay so for x86_64 rawhide yum is going to use about 450-500MB of memory
> > > for the package lists and depsolving. 
> > 
> > Eeeek.
> > Are you expecting the same memory consumption under F9-release?
> 
> For the same set of packages, etc on a 32bit box the memory size is
> 112MB.

Oh, that's far better.

> 
> It's due to how python does 64bit objects in memory - they explode about
> 2-3x the size.
> 
> James Antill has done some marvelous work reducing the overall memory
> footprint of yum, but it's not going to overcome the 64bit issue above.
> 
> Unless there is a compelling reason like you're using > 4GB of ram, you
> should think about running i686 not x86_64.

Yeah, you're right. I use 64bit on the guests just for the sake of
compatibility.
Guess I'll have to double the memory on 64bit guests.

P.S. I'd update the release notes about it:
(Read: Use 32bit if you have less then 2GB of memory)

> 
> 
> > > However, where you're seeing
> > > things run out of memory is where rpmlib is running the transaction.
> > If
> > > you file this as a bug, file it against rpm since that's where the
> > > memory use is increasing so much.
> > 
> > Done. [1]
> 
> Thank you.

I've retained the current snapshot (packages in cache; yum update
aborted) let me know if there's something that you want me to run before
I finish the update process manually. (rpm -Uvh
--force /var/cache/yum/rawhide/packages/*.rpm)

- Gilboa