On Wed, 2022-09-21 at 02:53 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
Tommy Nguyen wrote:
> DNF5 is ridiculously fast.
It is faster, but "ridiculously"? In the metric that matters (elapsed
wallclock time), your benchmark shows the update taking 30% less
time.
That said, there are other features of DNF5 (no more Python, shared
cache
between PackageKit and CLI) that are IMHO even more interesting than
the raw
speed gain.
Would you have preferred if I used a different superlative? I still
consider 30% less to be significant, especially because DNF5 processes
metadata in parallel which makes things seem faster, whether perceived
or real. And yes, the other improvements are good as well, but end
users focus on speed. See: constant discussions about how to make DNF4
faster (including enabling fastestmirror which can make things slower)
or perception that it is slower because it processes metadata at a
different stage than apt for example.