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 1PiZZ6-0002Hw-5d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:39:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A60FE0B9F; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:37:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ey0-f181.google.com (mail-ey0-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF24AE0B9F for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:37:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eyh6 with SMTP id 6so1490359eyh.40 for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:37:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lRfURAKR3v4a11tTBa1Z37snAsb25OtdWIn7OTLBmnE=; b=lXnHIqaI1zsTn5qwLM1S8JLSUzf0Ab0MyyW9IJN2r1DqawcACIoLy/XQSs7qT/u696 myvgRKx8yOxm6tZshWyGavmDnYnLCP5cDnlSclbGnk4TAzWAX8190WgPI98OGR4jcSCA 1Hk+D3QsqVssaCHZFt5mY0Kzvdik4Vih8IMqI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=UQB9CRAKGokNWISq/fK+SO03lJKfo2mIwNP0EsTyrtLpRfzVANONn57k8HH6I4wMbm CP5TxogCba5PvmdrgJMR5R/GvmEQqCc1uaOM5ylmulzLT4+YKRhT3kT1UD2W7fVzrUFr rbPOWVEMErH9HVOdehRonAou9OPZZWaFg7VuQ= 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 Received: by 10.204.100.136 with SMTP id y8mr1768354bkn.171.1296159902805; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 12:25:02 -0800 (PST) Sender: paul.hartman@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.18.197 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 12:25:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20110127140525.GA4844@ksp.sk> <201101271512.50141.joost@antarean.org> <20110127181325.GA26616@ksp.sk> <4D41CA78.6020109@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:25:02 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0RYWAecooXIn7B8ZmGhInhyTOj8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Simultaneously emerging multiple packages with same dependencies From: Paul Hartman To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: b8fd12a6344148e231729accfcbe48a2 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 w= ill > be slow-down. > > With the default kernel scheduler, best if amount of CPUs + 1. =A0(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!