Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Nilesh Govindrajan <me@××××××××.com>
To: Gentoo User Mailing List <gentoo-user@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is 'MAKEOPTS="--jobs --load-average=5"' silly?
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:38:08
Message-Id: CAHgBc-tO=CadhEDxNeHyFt_CpfTV35bbM_-oMg904W6tSyfTWA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Is 'MAKEOPTS="--jobs --load-average=5"' silly? by gottlieb@nyu.edu
1 On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:50 PM, <gottlieb@×××.edu> wrote:
2 > On Tue, Mar 26 2013, Neil Bothwick wrote:
3 >
4 >> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:43:25 +0530, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
5 >>
6 >>> It's better to limit the number of jobs to 2*CPUs (or cores) with a
7 >>> load control like --load-average=N where N is number of CPUs.
8 >
9 > I have two i7-3520Ms. Each has hyperthreading so "counts" as 2.
10 > In particular /proc/cpuinfo describes 4 "cpus".
11 >
12 > Nilesh, Does that mean you recommend
13 >
14 > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--jobs --load-average=4"
15 > MAKEOPTS="--jobs=8 --load-average=4"
16 >
17 > In particular I am not sure if your recommendation for load-average
18 > applied to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS as well or if you were just discussing
19 > MAKEOPTS.
20 >
21 > thanks,
22 > allan
23 >
24
25 It was for MAKEOPTS. If you have a really powerful processor, consider
26 splitting it for emerge options and make options. Would be faster.
27
28 @Walter, I'm also on a dual core machine, and as per my observation
29 over long emerges, load doesn't cross 2.2.
30 I have also observed that if it is limited to 2, system seems to be
31 under utilized, because make checks the 1 minute average instead of 15
32 minute average (well, it doesn't make sense otherwise).
33
34 This could apply to bigger processors too, so if you want full
35 utilization, slightly extrapolate the load average limit. Say by
36 20-30%.
37
38 --
39 Nilesh Govindrajan
40 http://nileshgr.com

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Is 'MAKEOPTS="--jobs --load-average=5"' silly? Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org>