From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp10.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms9.migadu.com with LMTPS id IF5DJSJomGTpewEASxT56A (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 18:15:30 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp10.migadu.com with LMTPS id KJ5MJCJomGRqWwEAG6o9tA (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 18:15:30 +0200 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 538AF37905 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 18:15:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qDSO6-0004YI-9k; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 12:14:54 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qDSO4-0004YA-AE for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 12:14:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qDSO2-0000Fl-F4 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 12:14:52 -0400 Received: from fews02-sea.riseup.net (fews02-sea-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.112]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4QpwzX0SnHzDqL8; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 16:14:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1687709688; bh=Phgn1p4qMe/KcUHNXJzr2/7wqJp7jjptr3VKAInbq4E=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:From; b=H42/VC4dxBHhTV3VFPMza08k0fIBpGVUD8LFjSBkcxS9X97dsflk7aFItOFAYW0+A h/hi/igL1ATYrzR4sNSQYut80gSUo3K2d4ZnAjo6AtaVSeBN0jKl/557Je3dg4MOlE HHWuA7ZpeyEW+dYQEcZfGtbZ240xEkaksBirC5CQ= X-Riseup-User-ID: 685EDC3AEAC4ED8A0968B2C538CAD22CB57035542B892A0F8FBE93082B07BA14 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews02-sea.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4QpwzV6gBMzFqjL; Sun, 25 Jun 2023 16:14:46 +0000 (UTC) References: <87h6qzzll7.fsf@ngraves.fr> <87h6qxyv2m.fsf@riseup.net> <87wmztqd8t.fsf@ngraves.fr> <875y7c3jnc.fsf@wireframe> From: Csepp To: Vagrant Cascadian Cc: Nicolas Graves , Csepp , guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Maybe a way to get a few more developpers to work on Guix ? Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2023 18:08:13 +0200 In-reply-to: <875y7c3jnc.fsf@wireframe> Message-ID: <877crr5xk6.fsf@riseup.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.252.153.129; envelope-from=raingloom@riseup.net; helo=mx1.riseup.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1687709725; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=KljCXGpQA5b5K9HTkE6mZNv6H/ZhvOBF7Fv8POarSk/Qs6KWiRyigUwAuSfTLnH4JeQvXl 6JsIaQ02jBck5KIDSNup1Shpb9xZRJUY2V15Zk5oe4adaXF25wYpJlrinE0oEGsYKEJzaS jQ5zhXjeLDelr5R+tTCwPQQTN9MhrPqkjk+LGwi7O5BcZT7aTnAt2IbYraik9Rne1lIvbU CcK8kFqvSNsRC086THn1TzYbxacFCil+T3Ptu5QMFiYueopNxfqWJCFAMGyTke/1+gvYKO CTWW4ztnSEp1LHoD3hPfdITkeakwYM1BJnvA+9WeEfTBVDbF/CVXPomO+nBNuA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b="H42/VC4d"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1687709725; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=UE/vbpvdRIi+m1FmiWK6bgNjG8R/OiK9y4Un3rGhg1I=; b=QTjqh67lrTpOSgxVbKyao5aEgElKVHyK5T1WxoWlPYC3rJF8WSjeBtlm4nd44BBpo6tJld 13qM/bf6Rf9/0sJ+5S4SGzqUX8kx5KEbYlloOMDYkA9BFusk3b+WzwtEsvj2bZ23lacKOf pR0td5Mol2Z9zgk0UAPgPhG4SktB4KjPgRPB3NtImhQeNZXj1j1uXbd9yq08TKp4N9lfC9 ZHX1tQS59F9Kzh0NooUcp9kjhOI55OO105j1IWWy8ciDQwRGgNcHN+VBnj64MGWADPhvW9 CCOM8JJVS2IpDXgRFCNXFbTsYQ4LF0GCQ+nlgskaazo/x9EgAMUgxIuBOKU9NQ== Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b="H42/VC4d"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -5.60 X-Spam-Score: -5.60 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 538AF37905 X-TUID: zyxH6MYA5Aff Vagrant Cascadian writes: > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > On 2023-06-24, Nicolas Graves via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." wrote: >> On 2023-06-24 13:08, Csepp wrote: >>> Nicolas Graves via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." writes: >>> IMHO LLMs for Guix are so damn not worth the effort. It will not fix >>> any of the actual issues with Guix, like the huge performance gap >>> between it and traditional package managers. >> >> I've also opened another discussion on the subject on guix-devel >> recently. Do you have any benchmark material to back this up? > > Well, I just ran "apt update" on Debian, and it took approximately 7 > seconds, which was mostly spent downloading moderately sized files from > Debian mirrors (~1MB). > > A corresponding "guix pull" took 299 seconds, downloading at least 8MB > (from a quick eyeball calculation as guix does not summarize the results > for me), and compiling all the various guix-*.drv that make up guix > pull. The vast majority of the time was spent compiling > derivations. This was also using a local copy of guix.git, so having to > update guix.git over the network would take even longer... (and it did > even spend a fair amount of time copying from the local guix.git on a > fast NVMe device) > > Obviously, guix pull is doing a lot more, but it is ... doing a lot > more! > > "apt install hello" (~2.3 seconds) and "guix install hello" (~1.5 > seconds) were actually in a similar ballpark, which honestly surprised > me. Guix is much faster with "guix remove hello" ... although arguably > "guix remove hello && guix gc --delete $(guix build hello)" would be a > more similar operation, and although I did not time it, it was > reasonably fast, too. > > So, presuming substitutes are available, the main slowness with guix > seems to be guix pull? NVMe (or even an SSD) helps a lot. And I suspect your system also has a good amount of RAM for IO caching and at least 4 modern 64 bit cores. Try running guix pull on a 32 bit machine with 1 GB of RAM and an HDD with LUKS for storage (and a lot of swap), you'll see a waaaay wider performance gap. Even simple operations like guix edit take much longer than they should. Yes, Guix does more, but a lot of what it does could be sped up.