From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F519138010 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:34:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 65C8A21C007; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:34:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F6121C001 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:33:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.2] (graaff.xs4all.nl [83.163.136.193]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: graaff) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D77BD33C28D for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:33:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1347467612.32530.1.camel@localhost> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EJOBS variable for EAPI 5? From: Hans de Graaff To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:33:32 +0200 In-Reply-To: <50508700.1030605@gentoo.org> References: <20544.29691.208130.35494@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120831154521.5258c549@googlemail.com> <20120831111244.0c17b8aa@gentoo.org> <20120902002002.GB25302@localhost> <20120904110041.GA19158@waltdnes.org> <50463738.7000209@gentoo.org> <504F6884.9000201@gmail.com> <504F6A21.4080709@gentoo.org> <504F6CB1.4030500@gentoo.org> <50505C12.4010307@malth.us> <50508700.1030605@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-54vy3ErpjUjQZCquTKLx" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: 1850c733-4a50-4cc8-855e-26b6a0431c46 X-Archives-Hash: ce28ed4a8ba098910ae556f78adb0fc6 --=-54vy3ErpjUjQZCquTKLx Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 08:58 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > So essentially what you're saying here is that it might be worthwhile > to look into parallelism as a whole and possibly come up with a > solution that combines 'emerge --jobs' and build-system parallelism > together to maximum benefit? Forget about jobs and load average, and just keep starting jobs all around until there is only 20% (or whatever tuneable amount) free memory left. As far as I can tell this is always the real bottleneck in the end. Once you hit swap overall throughput has to go down quite a bit. Hans --=-54vy3ErpjUjQZCquTKLx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EABEIAAYFAlBQuWIACgkQiIP6VqMIqNffRAEAijIrlrmpXOiaBKngimbb0D4q B1I0vt4RGHFm2dxPF08A/Axx8ZdzWIyNbsQV1qMRCjb5dBuriF5U5UVAG3XLki6z =InXF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-54vy3ErpjUjQZCquTKLx--