[CentOS] your thoughts on dnf-makecache

Tue Nov 9 16:11:03 UTC 2021
Götz Reinicke <goetz.reinicke at filmakademie.de>

Hi and thanks.

> Am 08.11.2021 um 13:09 schrieb Leon Fauster via CentOS <centos at centos.org>:
> Am 08.11.21 um 09:59 schrieb Götz Reinicke:
>> Hi,
>> From time to time I see different errors for dnf-makecache in the logs. e.g. „Errors during downloading metadata“, „Couldn't connect to server for“, „Timeout was reached“, „Couldn't resolve host name " or „Operation too slow“.
>> In all cases, a restart of the service solves the „problem“ and in other cases the next run dose it.
>> Beside having the errors, our current service monitoring triggers in most cases a warning message, and depending on the solution recovers too, which makes me wonder what would be the best practice for such situation.
>> a) do I need dnf-makecache? Will it speed up things so much and makes package management much more easy, so having some errors is o.k.?
>> b) adjust the config for dnf-makecache, so it will trigger less errors?
>> c) adjust our monitoring to ignore some errors or be more soft with triggering warnings?
>> C is the least preferred option right now.
>> What do you think, how do you handle dnf-makecache?
> It depends on your needs. We are okay with; stopping

hm, I don't see any real benefit in our environment. If I do an update, waiting few seconds more or less for the repo data to be downloaded, dose not matter.

> and disabling dnf-makecache.timer for prod systems.
> We have dnf-automatic enabled. So, the cache is
> rebuilded anyway …

I see.