Hi, thanks for the detailed response.
On 26 May 2015 at 00:31, David Kalnischkies <da...@kalnischkies.de> wrote: > Also, Wheezy has more packages and therefore more data than Jessie. True. But when disabling index compression and regenerating all caches, the difference in performance is so large that I don't believe it is due to the increase in the number of packages alone. Here's a simple Dockerfile that helps to illustrate the issue: FROM debian:jessie RUN rm /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/docker-* && apt-get update -qq CMD ["/bin/bash", "-c", \ "apt-cache gencaches && time apt-cache show apt > /dev/null"] Let's forget about my embarassingly slow laptop for a minute and run this on my fastest machine: ~/apt-benchmarking % sudo docker run --rm jessie-apt Reading package lists... Done real 0m0.399s user 0m0.076s sys 0m0.312s If I change "FROM debian:jessie" to "FROM debian:wheezy", apt-cache is much faster: ~/apt-benchmarking % sudo docker run --rm wheezy-apt Reading package lists... Done real 0m0.007s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.004s With the latest patches by jak, I'm down to 0.012s on jessie: real 0m0.012s user 0m0.004s sys 0m0.000s Again, ever so slightly slower than wheezy (see your comments regarding number of packages), but _much_ better than 1.0.9.8. Would be great to have these changes in jessie. Increasing APT::Cache-Start does not seem to have any measurable influence on the runtime for me. > It's also not so much what apt code does, but what code does who uses > libapt. Right, good point. Again, thanks for the fix! Best, Sebastian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org