From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1PiZgv-0003UM-5R for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:47:45 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1E287E0B0E; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:46:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq1.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq1.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.42.164]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB075E0B0C for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:46:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.42.149] (helo=smtp17.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq1.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PiZfa-0008By-Ay for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:46:22 +0100 Received: from 5ed3454e.cm-7-4b.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([94.211.69.78] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp17.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PiZfX-000193-Jd for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:46:19 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95E8527C9 for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:48:20 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zx9Q40NqCuJz for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:48:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 081ACF0A for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:48:20 +0100 (CET) From: "J. Roeleveld" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Simultaneously emerging multiple packages with same dependencies Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 22:46:17 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.4.5; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201101272246.18100.joost@antarean.org> X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1PiZfX-000193-Jd X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-0.928, vereist 5, BAYES_00 -1.90, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.98, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.01) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 9db702b88845ecc28e6c545deb7bc841 On Thursday 27 January 2011 21:25:02 Paul Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > > On 01/27/2011 09:41 PM, Dale wrote: > >> YoYo Siska wrote: > >>> Yes. > >>> It might not be perfect, but mostly it works pretty well. > >>> Once make started 10 or so process, which ate all my ram, because I > >>> forgot to reenable swap, when I was playing with something before that > >>> > >>> :) > >>> > >>> yoyo > >> > >> I noticed the same thing with mine. It used a LOT of ram. I have 4Gbs > >> and it was up to about 3Gbs at one point and using some swap as well. > >> I'm hoping to max out to 16Gbs as soon as I can. May upgrade to a 6 core > >> CPU too. > >> > >> I wonder how much faster it would be if the work directory is put on > >> tmpfs? With 16Gbs, that should work even for OOo. > > > > Btw, if you're using more instances than the amount of CPUs, the result > > will be slow-down. > > > > With the default kernel scheduler, best if amount of CPUs + 1. (On a > > 4-core, that's -j5). > > Once, when building my kernel, I accidentally forgot to specify the > number of makes and ran "make -j all". That was a really bad idea, the > system became totally unresponsive for quite a long time, much longer > than normal kernel build time, but it did eventually finish! I have found that multi-core systems with sufficient memory can handle "-j" (no value) a lot better then sindle-core systems. I do on occasion do it with the kernel and can still continue using the system. (For comparison, my desktop is a 4-core AMD64 with 8GB memory) -- Joost