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 6D452138010 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:20:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 90B4621C01F; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:19:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ee0-f53.google.com (mail-ee0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 719F1E0675 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eekb47 with SMTP id b47so1404543eek.40 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:18:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=x/XqNyqDQKBSB2j0MUqXaoekFNNXvJFKeZcoYeHuQ7U=; b=GaDo0pNeXj+epdchcuABaEsMDdt5+jFH6jbCWUoKy+WGH/KwOIxmVYG3Zmpj3r3Jw5 qyDoD4i2PrCFN+qZSTumbGE8draswj7OhG5lPpqpbNbx1fxRFCYpq0ytuIQ3cltCm/Oz bOtRglmGne9MrXtYVxi1GXPkSRIxLb5Urw1RbXzqNDYnimt1+Fr4q+e8MHRzL6APSVm6 GwiKn19r4pOinkP39xwX76VFxuJNja/w+okDdkUElR54ScPyleeMEYeSLlle8spXm6Oq 9RBbleD5yZdo9SMq0kVUk3bIW+deziGC6h+5q3ojeBNNfNIJ7h9WsayqwXC7/iVAfXMJ hICw== Received: by 10.14.198.65 with SMTP id u41mr32022929een.22.1347463087707; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:1418:211::2:18? ([2001:1418:211::2:18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e7sm57094867eep.2.2012.09.12.08.18.05 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5050A7AC.2090305@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:18:04 +0200 From: "vivo75@gmail.com" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.6esrpre) Gecko/20120809 Thunderbird/10.0.6 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 To: Zac Medico CC: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EJOBS variable for EAPI 5? 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> In-Reply-To: <504F6A21.4080709@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: c79b3790-1360-406b-8109-a3d6adc3828f X-Archives-Hash: d42c02c8dff8df1fc6454ab8ae615ad2 Il 11/09/2012 18:43, Zac Medico ha scritto: > On 09/11/2012 09:36 AM, vivo75@gmail.com wrote: >> Dunno where to place this request, but if we go for something like EJOBS >> could we also make it phase specific? >> So compile, install and test could have a different number of jobs running. >> Possibly three different variables that override a predefined EJOBS. > Per-phase sounds a little to fine-grained. Instead, I'd suggest to add > an ELOADAVG variable that's analogous to make's --load-average option. > That should be enough to compensate for any differences between phases. ok, but in my experience load-average really is too limited so I relaunch with the ability to control the following: - disk io - network - memory - cpu - jobs just tough that being able to control just jobs in a phase specific manner could have been sufficed ;-) Also this seem is a good job for containers, already implemented in the linux kernel, but will let someone with experience with them comment on the mattter.