From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ETzzR-0006jm-LX for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:55:42 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j9OArH07021000; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:53:17 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j9OAilii012286 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:44:48 GMT Received: from vms040pub.verizon.net ([206.46.252.40]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ETzot-0007yk-0r for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:44:47 +0000 Received: from mail.joat.com ([71.114.131.135]) by vms040.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2 HotFix 0.04 (built Dec 24 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0IOV00MNN1UM1ZB0@vms040.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 05:44:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (cornholio.joat.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.joat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C790F11D6A for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 05:42:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.joat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.joat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09442-03 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 05:41:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from butthead.joat.com (butthead.joat.com [192.168.0.10]) by mail.joat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 05:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 06:47:16 -0400 From: Dave Nebinger Subject: [gentoo-dev] PORTAGE_NICENESS is not so nice... To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-id: <200510240647.16996.dnebinger@joat.com> Organization: Joat.com Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at joat.com User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 X-Archives-Salt: a3c498a5-e928-4fbb-a988-c91fddd9fff9 X-Archives-Hash: da3d5745056ec8c35fab2e35e8339e0d So I set PORTAGE_NICENESS to 19 in /etc/make.conf on my primary gentoo desktop so I could do emerges in the background and still use my box... Well tonight I emerged boost... The system maxed out and ran that way for an hour without looking like it was going to complete anytime soon. Which wouldn't have been so bad if the system wasn't pegged to the point of being totally unresponsive under X. I eventually killed it and system load dropped back to normal. Commented out the PORTAGE_NICENESS value and emerged boost again. This time the system pegged again, but the whole process was finished in 10 minutes. So I'm starting to question how useful PORTAGE_NICENESS actually is... If the system is pegged under niceness 19 and 0, but 0 completes in 10 minutes, why would PORTAGE_NICENESS benefit me in any way? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list