On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 02:01:46PM +0000, Matt_Domsch(a)Dell.com wrote:
> I am under the impression currently that dropping
> directories would save DB space (the directories being then linked in
> the host_category_dir table listing for each host, in each category
> which dir are present) as well as crawling time (both in the UMDL and in
> == MD == You need non-repo directories for ISOs at least; there was a
time when we were able to mirror the entire Fedora static web content too;
able only because MM tracked all directories, not just repository
directories. MM1 also tried to be a "generic" mirror manager, not just a
Fedora-specific mirror manager, so I intentionally tracked everything, not
just Yum repos.
Idea: what if we were tracking only the folders that have files in them,
so for example http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/5/
would not end-up in
In addition, we could add a sort of blacklist to avoid storing
just due to the presence of the
This would reduce the number of directories we store for the Atomic tree.
== MD == I didn't optimize for a few non-file-containing directories.
You're welcome to if you see a need. But it's saving just a few entries
out of hundreds/thousands.
I got curious to see how it looks in reality, so I wrote a quick python script
that goes through the entire tree and count the number of folders, files and
folders with no files in them, this is how the results look like:
1814562 files found
4460 folders found
293 folders w/o files
Ran in 11.111 min
222697 files found
492 folders found
19 folders w/o files
Ran in 1.400 min
1309830 files found
13692 folders found
1614 folders w/o files
Ran in 4.633 min
3774530 files found
5576 folders found
651 folders w/o files
Ran in 26.701 min
2705931 files found
3095 folders found
351 folders w/o files
Ran in 22.042 min
Total time: 65.887 min
So it would save a few hundreds of entry in the directory table but it should
still save some place in the host_category_dir table.
Also when seeing this, it feels to me that we should be more flexible about
which part of the tree we run against, could even be a sub-part (ie: a specific
secondary arch or so).
I also would like to see if we can parallelize the browsing of the tree.