| |||||||||||||
Faster updates with yum-prestoFaster updates with yum-prestoPosted Apr 23, 2009 1:09 UTC (Thu) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)Parent article: Faster updates with yum-presto
"""
Keeping up with an active distribution like Fedora consumes a fair amount of time, but also bandwidth. Depending on the frequency that a yum update is performed, hundreds of megabytesor even gigabytescan be required to bring the system up to date. """
I went through the Fedora update archives some time back and came up with a stunning figure for the volume of updates issued over the (short) life of a Fedora release. I can't remember for sure, but I think it came out to about 12 gigabytes over the 13 month life-cycle. Almost a gigabyte a month.
(Log in to post comments)
Faster updates with yum-presto Posted Apr 23, 2009 5:34 UTC (Thu) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Were you counting the size of all the updates together or updates for the default set for one of the Live CD's or regular DVD image? I assume it was the former which doesn't effectively mean much since nobody installs everything. Fedora does have a large number of updates neverthless.
On a low bandwidth box, you can choose to install just the security updates via yum-security plugin or PackageKit.
Some update metrics are available from
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/metrics/?release=F10
Faster updates with yum-presto Posted Apr 23, 2009 15:16 UTC (Thu) by walters (subscriber, #7396) [Link]
No one sane has all packages installed. What's the impact on a typical desktop user? Server? Do the update sizes come from a few large packages or lots of little ones? Those are the questions you want to answer.
Thinking in terms of "all packages" is often wrong. And yes, defining "typical" is hard. I'd take the default comps group as a baseline and go from there.
Faster updates with yum-presto Posted Apr 23, 2009 19:12 UTC (Thu) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
"""
No one sane has all packages installed. """
So? I never said they did. Determining the update load for a typical install is not quite so straightforward. Never clean the yum cache, let the gigabytes accumulate, and check with 'du' I guess.
As an admin, however, I can say from experience that the Fedora patch load is *far* greater than that of any other distro I'm aware of, both in gigabytes, and in headaches when one of the many, many, many patches does something unexpected. (Churn yields burns.)
There are *lots* of reasons I migrated the Fedora servers to other distros, and extreme patch load is one of them.
|
|||||||||||||