From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59749158089 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:28:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4AE6A2BC06C; Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:28:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01b.ixn.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01b.ixn.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F9102BC056 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:28:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=wstn.localnet) by smarthost01b.ixn.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qgO2n-0005DY-K6 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:28:29 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] long compiles Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 12:28:29 +0100 Message-ID: <2913082.e9J7NaK4W3@wstn> In-Reply-To: References: 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Originating-smarthost01b-IP: [82.69.80.10] Feedback-ID: 82.69.80.10 X-Archives-Salt: 4e4b4b8c-e7d7-4c7c-aa1c-9a48a87b8635 X-Archives-Hash: 418b71a40140baea3efb486d59673fb3 On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 22:08:49 BST Wol wrote: > There's all sorts of tricks, some work for some people, others work for > others. Quite so. Here I have two swap partitions: 8GB priority 20 on NVME and 50GB priority 10 on SSD. I've never noticed either of them being used, so I suppose I could dispense with the smaller one. When I bought the machine I wanted it to be as powerful as I could reasonably justify (to run BOINC projects, making my own small contribution to the state of knowlege in astrophysics), so it has 64 GB RAM in its four slots. Tmpfs earns its keep here. I don't set limits on it, preferring to let the kernel manage it itself. One tmpfs is on /tmp, the other on /var/tmp/portage. With all that RAM to play in, swap is rarely used, if ever. A thought on compiling, which I hope some devs will read: I was tempted to push the system hard at first, with load average and jobs as high as I thought I could set them. I've come to believe, though, that job control by portage and /usr/bin/make is weak at very high loads, because I would usually find that a few packages had failed to compile; also that some complex programs were sometimes unstable. Therefore I've had to throttle the system to be sure(r) of correctness. Seems a waste. Thus: $ grep '\-j' /etc/portage/make.conf EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs=4 --load-average=32 [...]" MAKEOPTS="-j14" That 14 will revert to its previous 12 if I find things going bump in the night again, or perhaps go up a bit more if not. -- Regards, Peter.