| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 27 2011, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 17:09:27 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> > So on a 20 package world update, only 19 are faster while the 20th |
| 6 |
>> > runs at the same speed? Where's the loss there? Even if the last were |
| 7 |
>> > slower, it would be worth it. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Given the amount of time unpack/configure/install of most packages |
| 10 |
>> needs (very short), my observation is that it would not be worth it. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Even if that were true, how much time would you have to save to justify |
| 13 |
> adding -j 2 to EMERGE_DEFAULTS in make.conf? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> But it's not true, large packages spend a lot of time on these phases of |
| 16 |
> the install. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
OK I'm convinced since I know that those phases do take noticeable time. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I have a "4" processor i7 model 620 (2 cores, doubled for |
| 21 |
hyperthreading) and have set MAKEOPTS="-j5". |
| 22 |
If I add -jobs=2 to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS, should I lower |
| 23 |
MAKEOPTS to 3 (to 4)? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
thanks, |
| 26 |
allan |
Archives