Re: cpu usage, consideration of others, apt-listbugs
> I was looking at the various stats programs(http://master/mrtg/), and noticed
> that for the last week, master's incoming bw, outgoing bw, and load, have been
> unusually high.
>
> After some digging, I found 2 main causes.
>
> 1: The apt-listbugs author has seemed it nescessary to export all debbugs
> data, by way of a symlink, and then to allow admins to request bug reports
> when packages get updated. This was not done with any consultation with
> any BTS admin, nor any admin that is invovled in the machine that would be
> handling this increased load.
On IRC, I was suggested that apt-listbugs should use index.db. I had to
use debbugs .status file too because index.db doesn't have subject.
apt-listbugs fetches just few static files from web server, two index
files and .status files of actual critical bugs. So if 5 critical
bugs are found, total 7 static files are downloaded. apt-listbugs
can be used via normal proxy servers.
Anyway, i have to work for something to solve this problem. Currently, i
have a plan to make a mirror site for apt-listbugs (i didn't have a such
site) and if index.db will have subject, then apt-listbugs doesn't need
to fetch .status file at all.
> A quick grep thru the access.log for the bts, shows 116k total lines, and
> 48k lines are for apt-listbugs, requesting .status files, or the index
> files.
>
> What is not shown, is the requests for the actual bug reports. These can't
> be easily tracked, as apt-listbugs uses querybts(from reportbug), and a few
> other fallbacks, so it's not easy to match up those lines.
apt-listbugs doesn't use querybts implicity. It's invoked by people. So
I guess many cgi access is nothing to do with apt-listbugs.
Actually, apt-listbugs has cgi to fetch bug reports, but it's not a
default action. In addition, when apt-listbugs uses cgi directly, it
sends user-agent which shows apt-listbugs.
--
Masato Taruishi <taru@debian.org>
Reply to: