The previous entry was more of a general explanation about YUM speed and that if used in it's normal environment how current YUM is often more than fast enough, this entry is going to be a companion to it but focus on specific things that might make YUM appear slow but would better be described as using it suboptimally.
Note that I'm still not going to directly compare to other tools as I'm not as familiar with them and, as I said in the previous article, the tools are designed so differently that they don't lend themselves to comparisons. Also, as I also said before, if something is fine if it takes less than 10 seconds if two tools take 6 seconds and 4 seconds it doesn't really matter if yum is the faster (again, see the previous post, this should not be the end goal IMO).
( Read more...Collapse )
July 7 2008, 14:56:39 UTC 4 years ago
Difference between 10 and 4 seconds, in context
Kind of, if you are talking about a complete operation that you run "often" then absolutely (and if you run it very often, then even 4 seconds might be "too long"). However at the other end of the spectrum if it's one of many operations, and the others take 10-30 seconds combined and the user only runs this type of thing "rarely" then I'd have to disagree very strongly.
But let me just argue this way instead, do you have a usecase where you think the performance of yum matters from a UI point of view. You don't even need a comparison to apt/zypper/whatever, just a case where you think it's so slow it's hindering the UI. I'm not saying we can 100% "fix" it, but we'll certainly look at it.