1 |
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, at 1:40 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
2 |
> On 30-06-2020 13:13:29 -0500, Sid Spry wrote: |
3 |
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020, at 1:20 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
4 |
> > > Hi, |
5 |
> > > |
6 |
> > > On 29-06-2020 21:13:43 -0500, Sid Spry wrote: |
7 |
> > > > Hello, |
8 |
> > > > |
9 |
> > > > I have some runnable pseudocode outlining a faster tree verification algorithm. |
10 |
> > > > Before I create patches I'd like to see if there is any guidance on making the |
11 |
> > > > changes as unobtrusive as possible. If the radical change in algorithm is |
12 |
> > > > acceptable I can work on adding the changes. |
13 |
> > > > |
14 |
> > > > Instead of composing any kind of structured data out of the portage tree my |
15 |
> > > > algorithm just lists all files and then optionally batches them out to threads. |
16 |
> > > > There is a noticeable speedup by eliding the tree traversal operations which |
17 |
> > > > can be seen when running the algorithm with a single thread and comparing it to |
18 |
> > > > the current algorithm in gemato (which should still be discussed here?). |
19 |
> > > |
20 |
> > > I remember something that gemato used to use multiple threads, but |
21 |
> > > because it totally saturated disk-IO, it was brought back to a single |
22 |
> > > thread. People were complaining about unusable systems. |
23 |
> > > |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > I think this is an argument for cgroups limits support on the portage process or |
26 |
> > account as opposed to an argument against picking a better algorithm. That is |
27 |
> > something I have been working towards, but I am only one man. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> But this requires a) cgroups support, and b) the privileges to use it. |
30 |
> Shouldn't be a problem in the normal case, but just saying. |
31 |
> |
32 |
|
33 |
cgroups kernel support is a fairly common dependency. It can obviously be optional, |
34 |
I am thinking related to MAKEOPTS or EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS (see: rustc/cargo not |
35 |
respecting or being passed -j/-l as another use for cgroups) and supported best-effort, |
36 |
but is there any reason to expect it to not be enabled? |
37 |
|
38 |
If the user isn't either root or portage I think it reasonable to leave resource management |
39 |
to the machine's administrator. |