| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 3:46 PM, J. Roeleveld <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 27 January 2011 21:25:02 Paul Hartman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > On 01/27/2011 09:41 PM, Dale wrote: |
| 5 |
>> >> YoYo Siska wrote: |
| 6 |
>> >>> Yes. |
| 7 |
>> >>> It might not be perfect, but mostly it works pretty well. |
| 8 |
>> >>> Once make started 10 or so process, which ate all my ram, because I |
| 9 |
>> >>> forgot to reenable swap, when I was playing with something before that |
| 10 |
>> >>> |
| 11 |
>> >>> :) |
| 12 |
>> >>> |
| 13 |
>> >>> yoyo |
| 14 |
>> >> |
| 15 |
>> >> I noticed the same thing with mine. It used a LOT of ram. I have 4Gbs |
| 16 |
>> >> and it was up to about 3Gbs at one point and using some swap as well. |
| 17 |
>> >> I'm hoping to max out to 16Gbs as soon as I can. May upgrade to a 6 core |
| 18 |
>> >> CPU too. |
| 19 |
>> >> |
| 20 |
>> >> I wonder how much faster it would be if the work directory is put on |
| 21 |
>> >> tmpfs? With 16Gbs, that should work even for OOo. |
| 22 |
>> > |
| 23 |
>> > Btw, if you're using more instances than the amount of CPUs, the result |
| 24 |
>> > will be slow-down. |
| 25 |
>> > |
| 26 |
>> > With the default kernel scheduler, best if amount of CPUs + 1. (On a |
| 27 |
>> > 4-core, that's -j5). |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> Once, when building my kernel, I accidentally forgot to specify the |
| 30 |
>> number of makes and ran "make -j all". That was a really bad idea, the |
| 31 |
>> system became totally unresponsive for quite a long time, much longer |
| 32 |
>> than normal kernel build time, but it did eventually finish! |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> I have found that multi-core systems with sufficient memory can handle "-j" |
| 35 |
> (no value) a lot better then sindle-core systems. I do on occasion do it with |
| 36 |
> the kernel and can still continue using the system. (For comparison, my |
| 37 |
> desktop is a 4-core AMD64 with 8GB memory) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Strange, in my case it was an i7 920 (4 cores, hyperthreaded, appears |
| 40 |
as 8 CPUs to Linux) with 12GB of RAM. Maybe if I prefixed it |
| 41 |
with"nice" it would not have brought my computer to its knees... or |
| 42 |
maybe related to the schedulers and other kernel voodoo that I don't |
| 43 |
understand. I might try it again someday :) |
Archives