Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
[gentoo-user] Is 'MAKEOPTS="--jobs --load-average=5"' silly?
875 views
Skip to first unread message
gott...@nyu.edu
Mar 25, 2013, 5:00:03 PM3/25/13
to
For a long time I have had in make.conf
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ask --deep --tree --verbose --jobs --load-average=5"
MAKEOPTS="--jobs --load-average=5"
(for previous processors the 5 was 3).
It seems that this configuration fails for several packages (or tickles
bugs in their ebuilds/Makefiles).
Lately whenever a build fails I change to
MAKEOPTS="--jobs=1"
and this very often "fixes" the problem.
It is not clear that any time saved by having jobs=5 compensates for
having to redo builds. So my question is do people
1. keep jobs=1 in MAKEOPTS
2. have jobs=n in MAKEOPTS but degrade on error as I do
3. have jobs=n and file bugs when it fails.
thanks,
allan
PS I do not change EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ask --deep --tree --verbose --jobs --load-average=5"
MAKEOPTS="--jobs --load-average=5"
(for previous processors the 5 was 3).
It seems that this configuration fails for several packages (or tickles
bugs in their ebuilds/Makefiles).
Lately whenever a build fails I change to
MAKEOPTS="--jobs=1"
and this very often "fixes" the problem.
It is not clear that any time saved by having jobs=5 compensates for
having to redo builds. So my question is do people
1. keep jobs=1 in MAKEOPTS
2. have jobs=n in MAKEOPTS but degrade on error as I do
3. have jobs=n and file bugs when it fails.
thanks,
allan
PS I do not change EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS
Michael Hampicke
Mar 25, 2013, 6:30:01 PM3/25/13
to
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs=2 --load-average=6"
I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs option.
The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I have to build
spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod requires a
complete built spl.
Neil Bothwick
Mar 25, 2013, 6:30:01 PM3/25/13
to
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:57:09 -0400, gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
> It is not clear that any time saved by having jobs=5 compensates for
> having to redo builds. So my question is do people
>
> 1. keep jobs=1 in MAKEOPTS
> 2. have jobs=n in MAKEOPTS but degrade on error as I do
> 3. have jobs=n and file bugs when it fails.
>
> thanks,
> allan
>
> PS I do not change EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS
I have "--jobs --load-average=12" in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS and override
> It is not clear that any time saved by having jobs=5 compensates for
> having to redo builds. So my question is do people
>
> 1. keep jobs=1 in MAKEOPTS
> 2. have jobs=n in MAKEOPTS but degrade on error as I do
> 3. have jobs=n and file bugs when it fails.
>
> thanks,
> allan
>
> PS I do not change EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS
this for known problematic packages in /etc/portage/package.env.
For example:
% cat /etc/portage/package.env/libreoffice
app-office/libreoffice j4.conf
% cat /etc/portage/env/j4.conf
MAKEOPTS="-j4"
Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
which case I don't run emerge at all.
--
Neil Bothwick
Excuse for the day: daemons did it
Neil Bothwick
Mar 25, 2013, 6:40:02 PM3/25/13
to
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:27:04 +0100, Michael Hampicke wrote:
> This is what I use:
> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs=2 --load-average=6"
>
> I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs option.
> The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I have to build
> spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod requires a
> complete built spl.
Interesting, I have --jobs and portage doesn't try t build spl
> This is what I use:
> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs=2 --load-average=6"
>
> I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs option.
> The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I have to build
> spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod requires a
> complete built spl.
and zfs-kmod in parallel, it always completes spl first.
--
Neil Bothwick
If the cops arrest a mime, do they tell her she has the right to remain
silent?
gott...@nyu.edu
Mar 25, 2013, 10:30:01 PM3/25/13
to
On Mon, Mar 25 2013, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:57:09 -0400, gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
>
>> It is not clear that any time saved by having jobs=5 compensates for
>> having to redo builds. So my question is do people
>>
>> 1. keep jobs=1 in MAKEOPTS
>> 2. have jobs=n in MAKEOPTS but degrade on error as I do
>> 3. have jobs=n and file bugs when it fails.
>>
>> thanks,
>> allan
>>
>> PS I do not change EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS
>
> I have "--jobs --load-average=12" in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS and override
> this for known problematic packages in /etc/portage/package.env.
>
> For example:
>
> % cat /etc/portage/package.env/libreoffice
> app-office/libreoffice j4.conf
>
> % cat /etc/portage/env/j4.conf
> MAKEOPTS="-j4"
I see. Clever.
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:57:09 -0400, gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
>
>> It is not clear that any time saved by having jobs=5 compensates for
>> having to redo builds. So my question is do people
>>
>> 1. keep jobs=1 in MAKEOPTS
>> 2. have jobs=n in MAKEOPTS but degrade on error as I do
>> 3. have jobs=n and file bugs when it fails.
>>
>> thanks,
>> allan
>>
>> PS I do not change EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS
>
> I have "--jobs --load-average=12" in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS and override
> this for known problematic packages in /etc/portage/package.env.
>
> For example:
>
> % cat /etc/portage/package.env/libreoffice
> app-office/libreoffice j4.conf
>
> % cat /etc/portage/env/j4.conf
> MAKEOPTS="-j4"
Do you file bugs when you need to restrict MAKEOPTS?
Also I am somewhat surprised you can run libreoffice
with MAKEOPTS="-j4". I seem to remember that being one of the ones I
had to degrade.
Thanks for the tip, I will use it.
allan
gott...@nyu.edu
Mar 25, 2013, 10:30:02 PM3/25/13
to
MAKEOPTS.
That is, I always permit portage to run two emerges in parallel.
I am considering telling make to not run different parts of one emerge
in parallel.
allan
Dale
Mar 25, 2013, 10:50:01 PM3/25/13
to
gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
> Also I am somewhat surprised you can run libreoffice with
> MAKEOPTS="-j4". I seem to remember that being one of the ones I had to
> degrade. Thanks for the tip, I will use it. allan
I update libreoffice whenever it needs it and I have this setting:
> Also I am somewhat surprised you can run libreoffice with
> MAKEOPTS="-j4". I seem to remember that being one of the ones I had to
> degrade. Thanks for the tip, I will use it. allan
MAKEOPTS="-j16"
It hasn't failed me in a long time, except for the time I ran out of
space. Maybe things have been fixed so it can build with that setting
where it couldn't before? May want to try it sometime when you got time
on your hands.
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
gott...@nyu.edu
Mar 25, 2013, 10:50:02 PM3/25/13
to
On Mon, Mar 25 2013, Dale wrote:
> gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
>> Also I am somewhat surprised you can run libreoffice with
>> MAKEOPTS="-j4". I seem to remember that being one of the ones I had to
>> degrade. Thanks for the tip, I will use it. allan
>
> I update libreoffice whenever it needs it and I have this setting:
>
> MAKEOPTS="-j16"
>
> It hasn't failed me in a long time, except for the time I ran out of
> space. Maybe things have been fixed so it can build with that setting
> where it couldn't before? May want to try it sometime when you got time
> on your hands.
>
> Dale
Thanks. My data may well be old.
> gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
>> Also I am somewhat surprised you can run libreoffice with
>> MAKEOPTS="-j4". I seem to remember that being one of the ones I had to
>> degrade. Thanks for the tip, I will use it. allan
>
> I update libreoffice whenever it needs it and I have this setting:
>
> MAKEOPTS="-j16"
>
> It hasn't failed me in a long time, except for the time I ran out of
> space. Maybe things have been fixed so it can build with that setting
> where it couldn't before? May want to try it sometime when you got time
> on your hands.
>
> Dale
allan
Walter Dnes
Mar 25, 2013, 11:10:02 PM3/25/13
to
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:25:58PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote
> Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
> awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
> which case I don't run emerge at all.
Running around for a few hours trying to replicate an unreplicatable
build failure is even more of a waste. After the first couple of builds
that ran into problems, and were cured by -j1, I made it the default on
my mcahines.
--
Walter Dnes <walt...@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
> Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
> awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
> which case I don't run emerge at all.
build failure is even more of a waste. After the first couple of builds
that ran into problems, and were cured by -j1, I made it the default on
my mcahines.
--
Walter Dnes <walt...@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Neil Bothwick
Mar 26, 2013, 4:40:01 AM3/26/13
to
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:01:30 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> > Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
> > awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
> > which case I don't run emerge at all.
>
> Running around for a few hours trying to replicate an unreplicatable
> build failure is even more of a waste.
That depends on the number of cores you have. On a dual core system this
> > Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
> > awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
> > which case I don't run emerge at all.
>
> Running around for a few hours trying to replicate an unreplicatable
> build failure is even more of a waste.
may well be true, although I'd dispute even that.
% cat /etc/portage/package.env/* | grep -c -e j4 -e j1
4
Four packages out of the 1730 installed on this computer require special
treatment, and all of them build with -j4.
--
Neil Bothwick
Isn't it a bit unnerving that doctors call what they do "practice?"
Neil Bothwick
Mar 26, 2013, 4:40:01 AM3/26/13
to
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:29:00 -0400, gott...@nyu.edu wrote:
> > % cat /etc/portage/package.env/libreoffice
> > app-office/libreoffice j4.conf
> >
> > % cat /etc/portage/env/j4.conf
> > MAKEOPTS="-j4"
>
> I see. Clever.
>
> Do you file bugs when you need to restrict MAKEOPTS?
If I need to restrict it to -j1, it is builds with -j4 I consider the
> > % cat /etc/portage/package.env/libreoffice
> > app-office/libreoffice j4.conf
> >
> > % cat /etc/portage/env/j4.conf
> > MAKEOPTS="-j4"
>
> I see. Clever.
>
> Do you file bugs when you need to restrict MAKEOPTS?
"bug" to be self-inflicted :)
> Also I am somewhat surprised you can run libreoffice with
> MAKEOPTS="-j4". I seem to remember that being one of the ones I had to
> degrade.
have -j1 forced in the ebuild. Perhaps the time the LO guys spent on code
cleanup covered more than removing a ton of German comments to no longer
used functions :-O
--
Neil Bothwick
@@@@ There are two kinds of people in this world: Those who are
good with words, and those who are... erm... thingy @@@@
Nilesh Govindrajan
Mar 26, 2013, 11:20:03 AM3/26/13
to
well regarding which load average does make account for.
A couple of packages started failing compile and it turns out that
they don't work well with the infinite jobs that make --jobs spawns.
It's better to limit the number of jobs to 2*CPUs (or cores) with a
load control like --load-average=N where N is number of CPUs.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=452942
--
Nilesh Govindrajan
http://nileshgr.com
Neil Bothwick
Mar 26, 2013, 1:00:02 PM3/26/13
to
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:43:25 +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> I'd done this experiment sometime ago, and I had sent a mail here as
> well regarding which load average does make account for.
> A couple of packages started failing compile and it turns out that
> they don't work well with the infinite jobs that make --jobs spawns.
>
> It's better to limit the number of jobs to 2*CPUs (or cores) with a
> load control like --load-average=N where N is number of CPUs.
That makes sense, I've altered my settings to
> I'd done this experiment sometime ago, and I had sent a mail here as
> well regarding which load average does make account for.
> A couple of packages started failing compile and it turns out that
> they don't work well with the infinite jobs that make --jobs spawns.
>
> It's better to limit the number of jobs to 2*CPUs (or cores) with a
> load control like --load-average=N where N is number of CPUs.
% grep jobs /etc/portage/make.conf
MAKEOPTS="--jobs 16 --load 10"
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--alphabetical --jobs --load-average 12"
and two of the previously troublesome packages, libreoffice and
virtualbox, now work with no override.
--
Neil Bothwick
One difference between a man and a machine is that a machine is quiet
when well oiled.
Michael Hampicke
Mar 26, 2013, 5:00:03 PM3/26/13
to
Am 25.03.2013 23:32, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:27:04 +0100, Michael Hampicke wrote:
>
>> This is what I use:
>> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs=2 --load-average=6"
>>
>> I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs option.
>> The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I have to build
>> spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod requires a
>> complete built spl.
>
> Interesting, I have --jobs and portage doesn't try t build spl
> and zfs-kmod in parallel, it always completes spl first.
>
Interesting. Maybe a problem with module-rebuild? I will look into this
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:27:04 +0100, Michael Hampicke wrote:
>
>> This is what I use:
>> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs=2 --load-average=6"
>>
>> I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs option.
>> The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I have to build
>> spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod requires a
>> complete built spl.
>
> Interesting, I have --jobs and portage doesn't try t build spl
> and zfs-kmod in parallel, it always completes spl first.
>
when I have some spare time.
Freshly merged kernel sources, kernel configured, compiled and
installed. Then I ran module-rebuild:
# module-rebuild rebuild
** Preparing to merge modules:
** Packages which I will emerge are:
=net-misc/r8168-8.035.00-r1
=app-emulation/virtualbox-modules-4.2.10
=x11-drivers/ati-drivers-13.3_beta2
=sys-kernel/spl-0.6.0_rc14-r3
=sys-fs/zfs-kmod-0.6.0_rc14-r5
5 4 3 2 1
>>> Verifying ebuild manifests
>>> Running pre-merge checks for x11-drivers/ati-drivers-13.3_beta2
* Determining the location of the kernel source code
* Found kernel source directory:
* /usr/src/linux
* Found kernel object directory:
* /lib/modules/3.8.4-gentoo/build
* Found sources for kernel version:
* 3.8.4-gentoo
* Checking for suitable kernel configuration options...
[ ok ]
>>> Emerging (1 of 5) net-misc/r8168-8.035.00-r1
>>> Emerging (2 of 5) app-emulation/virtualbox-modules-4.2.10
>>> Installing (1 of 5) net-misc/r8168-8.035.00-r1
>>> Emerging (3 of 5) x11-drivers/ati-drivers-13.3_beta2
>>> Emerging (4 of 5) sys-kernel/spl-0.6.0_rc14-r3
>>> Installing (2 of 5) app-emulation/virtualbox-modules-4.2.10
>>> Installing (3 of 5) x11-drivers/ati-drivers-13.3_beta2
>>> Emerging (5 of 5) sys-fs/zfs-kmod-0.6.0_rc14-r5
>>> Failed to emerge sys-fs/zfs-kmod-0.6.0_rc14-r5, Log file:
>>> '/var/tmp/portage/sys-fs/zfs-kmod-0.6.0_rc14-r5/temp/build.log'
>>> Installing (4 of 5) sys-kernel/spl-0.6.0_rc14-r3
>>> Jobs: 4 of 5 complete, 1 failed Load avg: 1.53,
0.90, 1.05
And the error:
checking kernel file name for module symbols... Module.symvers
checking spl source directory... Not found
configure: error:
*** Please make sure the spl devel package for your distribution
*** is installed then try again. If that fails you can specify the
*** location of the spl source with the '--with-spl=PATH' option.
Neil Bothwick
Mar 26, 2013, 5:50:02 PM3/26/13
to
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 21:58:29 +0100, Michael Hampicke wrote:
> >> I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs
> >> option. The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I
> >> have to build spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod
> >> requires a complete built spl.
> >
> > Interesting, I have --jobs and portage doesn't try t build spl
> > and zfs-kmod in parallel, it always completes spl first.
> >
>
> Interesting. Maybe a problem with module-rebuild? I will look into this
> when I have some spare time.
>
> Freshly merged kernel sources, kernel configured, compiled and
> installed. Then I ran module-rebuild:
>
>
> # module-rebuild rebuild
The only difference I can see is that I use
> >> I havent't had any failed builds that were related to the --jobs
> >> option. The only exception is when rebuilding my kernel modules. I
> >> have to build spl first, then zfs-kmod. But that's because zfs-kmod
> >> requires a complete built spl.
> >
> > Interesting, I have --jobs and portage doesn't try t build spl
> > and zfs-kmod in parallel, it always completes spl first.
> >
>
> Interesting. Maybe a problem with module-rebuild? I will look into this
> when I have some spare time.
>
> Freshly merged kernel sources, kernel configured, compiled and
> installed. Then I ran module-rebuild:
>
>
> # module-rebuild rebuild
emerge @module-rebuild
--
Neil Bothwick
Stop tagline theft! Copyright your tagline (c)
Walter Dnes
Mar 27, 2013, 8:50:02 AM3/27/13
to
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 08:34:29AM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote
I'm still not totally clear on "load-average". Should I set...
MAKEOPTS="-j2 --load-average=2"
...on a dual core machine?
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:01:30 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> > > Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
> > > awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
> > > which case I don't run emerge at all.
> >
> > Running around for a few hours trying to replicate an unreplicatable
> > build failure is even more of a waste.
>
> That depends on the number of cores you have. On a dual core system this
> may well be true, although I'd dispute even that.
>
> % cat /etc/portage/package.env/* | grep -c -e j4 -e j1
> 4
>
> Four packages out of the 1730 installed on this computer require special
> treatment, and all of them build with -j4.
Seeing as how even my older machines are dual core, I'll bump it -j2.
>
> > > Running MAKEOPTS="-j1" as default on a multi-core processor seems an
> > > awful waste of resources, unless it is needed for something else, in
> > > which case I don't run emerge at all.
> >
> > Running around for a few hours trying to replicate an unreplicatable
> > build failure is even more of a waste.
>
> That depends on the number of cores you have. On a dual core system this
> may well be true, although I'd dispute even that.
>
> % cat /etc/portage/package.env/* | grep -c -e j4 -e j1
> 4
>
> Four packages out of the 1730 installed on this computer require special
> treatment, and all of them build with -j4.
I'm still not totally clear on "load-average". Should I set...
MAKEOPTS="-j2 --load-average=2"
...on a dual core machine?
gott...@nyu.edu
Mar 27, 2013, 10:30:01 AM3/27/13
to
On Tue, Mar 26 2013, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:43:25 +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>
>> It's better to limit the number of jobs to 2*CPUs (or cores) with a
>> load control like --load-average=N where N is number of CPUs.
I have two i7-3520Ms. Each has hyperthreading so "counts" as 2.
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:43:25 +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>
>> It's better to limit the number of jobs to 2*CPUs (or cores) with a
>> load control like --load-average=N where N is number of CPUs.
In particular /proc/cpuinfo describes 4 "cpus".
Nilesh, Does that mean you recommend
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs --load-average=4"
MAKEOPTS="--jobs=8 --load-average=4"
In particular I am not sure if your recommendation for load-average
applied to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS as well or if you were just discussing
MAKEOPTS.
thanks,
allan
Nilesh Govindrajan
Mar 27, 2013, 10:40:03 AM3/27/13
to
splitting it for emerge options and make options. Would be faster.
@Walter, I'm also on a dual core machine, and as per my observation
over long emerges, load doesn't cross 2.2.
I have also observed that if it is limited to 2, system seems to be
under utilized, because make checks the 1 minute average instead of 15
minute average (well, it doesn't make sense otherwise).
This could apply to bigger processors too, so if you want full
utilization, slightly extrapolate the load average limit. Say by
20-30%.
Walter Dnes
Mar 27, 2013, 2:20:01 PM3/27/13
to
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 08:07:06PM +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote
> @Walter, I'm also on a dual core machine, and as per my observation
> over long emerges, load doesn't cross 2.2.
> I have also observed that if it is limited to 2, system seems to be
> under utilized, because make checks the 1 minute average instead of 15
> minute average (well, it doesn't make sense otherwise).
>
> This could apply to bigger processors too, so if you want full
> utilization, slightly extrapolate the load average limit. Say by
> 20-30%.
OK, I'll go with...
MAKEOPTS="-j2 --load-average=3"
> @Walter, I'm also on a dual core machine, and as per my observation
> over long emerges, load doesn't cross 2.2.
> I have also observed that if it is limited to 2, system seems to be
> under utilized, because make checks the 1 minute average instead of 15
> minute average (well, it doesn't make sense otherwise).
>
> This could apply to bigger processors too, so if you want full
> utilization, slightly extrapolate the load average limit. Say by
> 20-30%.
MAKEOPTS="-j2 --load-average=3"
Michael Hampicke
Mar 27, 2013, 3:00:02 PM3/27/13
to
the tip, I did not know of this @set
Neil Bothwick
Mar 27, 2013, 9:40:01 PM3/27/13
to
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 19:54:39 +0100, Michael Hampicke wrote:
> emerge @module-rebuild seems to work just fine on my machine. Thx for
> the tip, I did not know of this @set
@x11-module-rebuild is worth knowing about too :)
> emerge @module-rebuild seems to work just fine on my machine. Thx for
> the tip, I did not know of this @set
--
Neil Bothwick
Fine day for a good workout. Steal something heavy.
Peter Humphrey
Mar 28, 2013, 10:10:01 AM3/28/13
to
On Wednesday 27 March 2013 18:16:22 Walter Dnes wrote:
> OK, I'll go with...
>
> MAKEOPTS="-j2 --load-average=3"
This box is an i5 with four single-threaded CPUs and I limit the average load to 8. Since emerge is running at niceness=3 the desktop remains responsive throughout. I used not to limit the load at all and KDE was still fine to work with. I sometimes think that with modern systems there's no need to impose limits of my own since the kernel can cope well by itself.
In fact I'm going to remove the load limit and see how I get on.
--
Peter
Stroller
Mar 28, 2013, 3:30:02 PM3/28/13
to
On 28 March 2013, at 14:03, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> ...
> This box is an i5 with four single-threaded CPUs …
Your usage of the term "CPUs" is making me twitch.
Peter Humphrey
Mar 28, 2013, 8:50:02 PM3/28/13
to
What would you have said?
And it wasn't usage, it was use.
--
Peter
Mateusz Kowalczyk
Mar 28, 2013, 9:30:01 PM3/28/13
to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 29/03/13 00:40, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday 28 March 2013 19:28:47 Stroller wrote:
>> On 28 March 2013, at 14:03, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>> ... This box is an i5 with four single-threaded CPUs �
four cores in it.
- --
Mateusz K.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)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=2eKx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 29/03/13 00:40, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday 28 March 2013 19:28:47 Stroller wrote:
>> On 28 March 2013, at 14:03, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>
>> Your usage of the term "CPUs" is making me twitch.
>
> What would you have said?
>
> And it wasn't usage, it was use.
>
I can only imagine he was pointing out that you have a single CPU with
>> Your usage of the term "CPUs" is making me twitch.
>
> What would you have said?
>
> And it wasn't usage, it was use.
>
four cores in it.
- --
Mateusz K.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)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=2eKx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Peter Humphrey
Mar 28, 2013, 10:00:02 PM3/28/13
to
On Friday 29 March 2013 01:24:48 Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote:
> I can only imagine he was pointing out that you have a single CPU with
> four cores in it.
You're right, of course. I should have said /cores/.
--
Peter
Nilesh Govindrajan
Mar 28, 2013, 11:40:01 PM3/28/13
to
Mick
Mar 29, 2013, 8:40:01 AM3/29/13
to
MAKEOPTS="-j5 -l12.8"
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"
Why is -l set at 12.8 ... ? At some distant point in the past this made sense
to me, but I have no idea how I arrived at it. Other than the cooling fan
speeding up I have not noticed a problem with any ebuilds. Very rarely I
might have used -j1 to complete a failing ebuild, but it was so long ago I
can't even recall it.
--
Regards,
Mick
Neil Bothwick
Mar 29, 2013, 9:00:02 AM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:36:56 +0000, Mick wrote:
> I've got a first generation i7 and this is what I have set up in my
> make.conf:
>
> MAKEOPTS="-j5 -l12.8"
> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"
n is the default for quiet-build if --jobs is set to 1, or unspecified.
> I've got a first generation i7 and this is what I have set up in my
> make.conf:
>
> MAKEOPTS="-j5 -l12.8"
> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"
But using a higher value will give you faster updates. The MAKEOPTS
setting has no effect during the preparation and installation stages of
an ebuild, and with --jobs=1 that means your CPU spends a lot of time
idling.
--
Neil Bothwick
This is as bad as it can get - but don't bet on it.
Stroller
Mar 29, 2013, 1:00:02 PM3/29/13
to
On 29 March 2013, at 03:36, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>> ...
>>> I can only imagine he was pointing out that you have a single CPU with four cores in it.
>>
>> You're right, of course. I should have said /cores/.
>
>>
>> You're right, of course. I should have said /cores/.
>
> Cores or CPUs.. in this context it's *almost*, __NOT EXACTLY__ same.
Which is exactly what was so twitch inducing!
Stroller.
»Q«
Mar 29, 2013, 1:40:02 PM3/29/13
to
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core_processor>.
Dale
Mar 29, 2013, 1:50:01 PM3/29/13
to
Especially this FIRST part:
"A multi-core processor is a single computing component . . ."
So, it is a SINGLE component. To me, CPUs means having more than one CPU component, such as dual CPUs or even quad CPUs which used to be fairly common.
I have a single CPU computer. It has 4 cores but a single CPU. I hope to upgrade one day to a 8 core CPU. I'll still have a single CPU component installed tho.
This is getting really funny. ROFL You can tell when the list is getting slow when we start parsing each word and each words meaning. ;-)
"A multi-core processor is a single computing component . . ."
So, it is a SINGLE component. To me, CPUs means having more than one CPU component, such as dual CPUs or even quad CPUs which used to be fairly common.
I have a single CPU computer. It has 4 cores but a single CPU. I hope to upgrade one day to a 8 core CPU. I'll still have a single CPU component installed tho.
This is getting really funny. ROFL You can tell when the list is getting slow when we start parsing each word and each words meaning. ;-)
Michael Mol
Mar 29, 2013, 2:10:02 PM3/29/13
to
On 03/29/2013 01:46 PM, Dale wrote:
> »Q« wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:54:37 +0000
>> Stroller <stro...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29 March 2013, at 03:36, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> I can only imagine he was pointing out that you have a single CPU
>>>>>> with four cores in it.
>>>>> You're right, of course. I should have said /cores/.
>>>> Cores or CPUs.. in this context it's *almost*, __NOT EXACTLY__ same.
>>> Which is exactly what was so twitch inducing!
>> Whatever you do, don't read the first sentence at
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core_processor>.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Especially this FIRST part:
>
> "A *multi-core processor* is a single computing
> »Q« wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:54:37 +0000
>> Stroller <stro...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29 March 2013, at 03:36, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> I can only imagine he was pointing out that you have a single CPU
>>>>>> with four cores in it.
>>>>> You're right, of course. I should have said /cores/.
>>>> Cores or CPUs.. in this context it's *almost*, __NOT EXACTLY__ same.
>>> Which is exactly what was so twitch inducing!
>> Whatever you do, don't read the first sentence at
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core_processor>.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Especially this FIRST part:
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computing> component . . ."
>
> So, it is a SINGLE component. To me, CPUs means having more than one
> CPU component, such as dual CPUs or even quad CPUs which used to be
> fairly common.
>
> I have a single CPU computer. It has 4 cores but a single CPU. I hope
> to upgrade one day to a 8 core CPU. I'll still have a single CPU
> component installed tho.
>
> This is getting really funny. ROFL You can tell when the list is
> getting slow when we start parsing each word and each words meaning. ;-)
The list hasn't been slow all week. ^^
> So, it is a SINGLE component. To me, CPUs means having more than one
> CPU component, such as dual CPUs or even quad CPUs which used to be
> fairly common.
>
> I have a single CPU computer. It has 4 cores but a single CPU. I hope
> to upgrade one day to a 8 core CPU. I'll still have a single CPU
> component installed tho.
>
> This is getting really funny. ROFL You can tell when the list is
> getting slow when we start parsing each word and each words meaning. ;-)
Nilesh Govindrajan
Mar 30, 2013, 5:50:01 AM3/30/13
to
Another interesting point about this load control thing is that if the package uses a build system which doesn't support load control, load will surge high.
It is currently happening with me while installing Mongo, because the build system scons doesn't have load control feature.
0 new messages