Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:32:29 -0700 From: Kent Stewart <kstewart@urx.com> To: mikea <mikea@mikea.ath.cx> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: question about wc on for NON-critical workstation (no flamebait) Message-ID: <3B5DCD4D.9B0BE80F@urx.com> References: <20010724180907.A71575@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3B5DAECF.E9FE622D@mitre.org> <3B5DB1FA.1B894F9E@urx.com> <20010724184624.B71800@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010724141346.A5878@mikea.ath.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
mikea wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 06:46:24PM +0100, j mckitrick wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 10:35:54AM -0700, Kent Stewart wrote: > > | My buildworld on a dual 866 coppermine system went from 42 minutes to 29 > > | minutes. The other side effect was the -j8 parameter finally did > > | something. Before that anything from -j2 on, actually made the > > > > I thought over -j2 was not recommended, and often broke? > > The recommendation I've seen is two jobs per processor. In Kent's > case and mine, with dual processors, we could run with -j4 and > not exceed the recommendation. Im practice, I find that -j8 (four > jobs per processor, on average) works very handily in almost all > cases. Where I got into disagreement was the Handbook. It stated -j4 was good for single cpus and -j6 to -j10 for multi-processor systems. I never saw that and started refering to it as a "FreeBSD Urban Legend", i.e., something that only worked on someone elses system. > > >From time to time, a job will require a module that hasn't been > built then by another job running in parallel, but a rerun of > the make generally succeeds. > > > | buildworld run longer. I think the cpu's were starved for I/O. The > > | system is built around 3-ATA-100 Maxtor 30GB HD's. The motherboard is a > > | VP6 and each HD is on its own controller. Using raid-0 also slowed the > > | compile down. > > > > A far cry from my little laptop. ;-) > > My box isn't quite the horse that Kent's is, but I have noticed > a significant speed increase with -j8 over -j4, even with two > 30GB ATA-66 HDs. > > I think I'll turn on write caching and live dangerously for a > while. This system is basically a test system. Occasionally I see a message that -stable is broken. I want a fast build. If I am around, I can see if your failure is real. If my system builds, it was your error or you need to recvsup. If my build fails, than we have two systems failing. My system is pretty simple and a failure on it could be a real problem or we both need to recvsup. It is built often enough and I have an HTML version of all of the recent source changes. It is usually pretty simple to point a finger in the right direction. I just can't pass the pointy hat :). BTW, I didn't know they called them sysadmins in 1964. There were some systems in the late 60's that I was challenged to break. I was given the procedure to access system functions that could panic a system and told that wasn't fair. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA Cool site http://www.bmwfilms.com mailto:kbstew99@hotmail.com http://kstewart.urx.com/kstewart/index.html http://daily.daemonnews.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B5DCD4D.9B0BE80F>