On Wednesday, 29 November 2023 10:26:36 GMT Michael wrote: > Here's my hypothesis explaining your own observation with libreoffice. As a > package or more finished emerging, libreoffice's turn comes up. Soon > libreoffice starts to execute make jobs, but any of the following may > apply: > > 1. There are only 4 out of 30 jobs available, because other packages are > already using 26, throughout your window of observation.
Nope. Nothing else in progress. > 2. Libreoffice sequencing of make jobs is mostly linear with succeeding make > jobs waiting on output from their predecessors. That's possible, but it doesn't seem likely with such a huge code base. And why four processes, specifically and consistently? > 3. Libreoffice source code is not optimised for high parallelism - I recall > when it was hardcoded at -j1 just a few years ago. Before this restriction > was added, any bug reporters were advised to try again after limiting make > to -j1. Yes, that was common to many packages for a long time because of incomplete optimisation. > Next time I'm building libreoffice on a beefier system I'll keep an eye out > for the number of jobs to see what it gets up to. That would help, yes. The contribution of distcc isn't clear to me yet, as I said before. Sometimes it's the bee's knees; other times it might just as well not be there. I don't like mysteries... :) -- Regards, Peter.
