From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 24 09:48:27 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA4DB795; Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:48:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pd0-x22d.google.com (mail-pd0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA00DA72; Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:48:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pd0-f173.google.com with SMTP id fp1so2551287pdb.4; Sat, 24 Jan 2015 01:48:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rzwOdDiQo9IBlH/24hHkNjS/FSpt/IehY/fRUbYCKDw=; b=amdupbeNZCTxQCaSInVMxZmNoY4SBvg6mlhGtLHzZ79vUrf+Us6S8Ewprsxm124vkr PrE92bLuomALoZaBIlSdLUACAxbRij3nwecRgQsQH7iHq3lW7U4CEnHt7mLSv23VJYq5 iapud4AGFuJpRplPrToKZGM/4mvzuWcPLOjOymWGV//JZ14nSe/wrdgVicjpJIhnLsat GV9BCyOoyJe5BOZUMa3liKWJlbrzVqyL0BHazhtUW1fQNUvdiNU3hcrRVEto61fLCFIs M+7JaAPEO9KMd1rB0WgJAEFCUsyVlRD0avSrkyRHYt2YdW0GMjfPgu787kmTYKnDK5Xn lozQ== X-Received: by 10.70.130.73 with SMTP id oc9mr18356154pdb.42.1422092906040; Sat, 24 Jan 2015 01:48:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.107] (ppp59-167-128-11.static.internode.on.net. [59.167.128.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qm7sm4256480pbc.46.2015.01.24.01.48.23 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 24 Jan 2015 01:48:25 -0800 (PST) Sender: Kubilay Kocak Message-ID: <54C36A5D.1090002@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 20:48:13 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak Reply-To: koobs@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/34.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bryan Drewery , olli hauer , Kurt Jaeger Subject: Re: Poudriere MFS support [was Re: Poudriere Timeout] References: <201501190145.t0J1jKvg006268@slippy.cwsent.com> <54BCF7C9.7090502@toco-domains.de> <20150119154822.GX44537@home.opsec.eu> <54BD3203.5050809@toco-domains.de> <20150119191834.GH83169@home.opsec.eu> <54BD5EF8.4010201@gmx.de> <54C18027.7050002@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54C18027.7050002@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Torsten Zuehlsdorff X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:48:27 -0000 On 23/01/2015 9:56 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 1/19/2015 1:46 PM, olli hauer wrote: >> On 2015-01-19 20:18, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>>>>> Yes, i have. I've solved this problem by moving the build-jails of >>>>>> poudriere to an memory disk. This make poudriere no longer io-bund and >>>>>> incredibly fast. And solve this issue ;) >>> >>>>> How did you do this ? I want to try this myself 8-} >>> >>>> I've hacked poudriere to run within a jail. >>> >>> Aha, the .m mountpoint. My test host has 32 GB, so 20 GB should not be >>> a problem. >>> >>> Testport: www/p5-Selenium-Remote-Driver on 10.1-amd64, 9.3-amd64 and 8.4-i386. >>> >>> Results: >>> >>> old: 00:05:43 >>> new: 00:05:11 >>> >>> old: 00:01:56 >>> new: 00:00:12 >>> >>> old: 00:02:11 >>> new: 00:00:14 >>> >>> Nice! >>> >> >> Hi Kurt, >> >> are you running PD also in a jail? >> >> If not PD can be tuned by setting MFSSIZE *or* USE_TMPFS in poudriere.conf. >> >> On my system I have good results with 8 concurrent builds and MFSSIZE=6G or 'USE_TMPFS=all'. >> Fine tuning can be done with an additional SSD (look at `systat -iostat' during a build) >> >> poudriere.conf: >> >> # When building packages, a memory device can be used to speedup the build. >> # Only one of MFSSIZE or USE_TMPFS is supported. TMPFS is generally faster >> # and will expand to the needed amount of RAM. MFS is a bit slower, but is >> # more mature and can have its memory usage capped. >> >> # If set WRKDIRPREFIX will be mdmfs of the given size (mM or gG) >> #MFSSIZE=4G >> >> # Use tmpfs(5) >> ... >> # all - Run the entire build in memory, including builder jails. >> USE_TMPFS=all >> > > > Why do people pick MFS over TMPFS? I've found MFS/UFS significantly > slower than TMPFS on FreeBSD 10+. > > I'm very inclined to remove MFS support from Poudriere as it is far less > supported as TMPFS and not tested well. > > I suspect the reason is due to size constraint not being supported in > the past. TMPFS_LIMIT can be used just as MFSSIZE can be. > >From LOCALBASE/etc/poudriere.conf: MFS is a bit slower, but is more mature and can have its memory usage capped. This is why I chose it, in particular the memory cap. I'll switch back over to TMPFS and see how we go. ./koobs