Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 17:29 +0100, Alex Schuster wrote: Neil Bothwick writes: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:14:22 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote: The cruelty is actually worse: the machines that will benefit most from an OOo compile from source, are those old, low memory, asthmatic boxen, that take two days to complete the emerge! I am tempted to start cross-compiling. I've often used distcc between amd64 and x86 machines, for example, and had no problems (except that not enough is farmed out). Uh, really? I thought I had to setup cross compiling for that. Cool, I can skip that then. You just saved me a lot of trouble, thanks. ahhh (penny drops). The cake is a lie! I remember now I used P4 and P3 before. I haven't actually done it with my amd 64bit, which is running x86 anyway. sorry for the stuffup. However you may be interested in http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_AMD64-x86-distcc and I'm sure there are more! cya, -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au Fortune's Real-Life Courtroom Quote #19: Q: Doctor, how many autopsies have you performed on dead people? A: All my autopsies have been performed on dead people. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:14:22 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote: The cruelty is actually worse: the machines that will benefit most from an OOo compile from source, are those old, low memory, asthmatic boxen, that take two days to complete the emerge! I am tempted to start cross-compiling. I've often used distcc between amd64 and x86 machines, for example, and had no problems (except that not enough is farmed out). AFAIR the OOo build won't use distcc. It used to take up to 16 hours on my iBook, with no bin package available. Now it takes 3-4 hours, so runs while I sleep. The binary version clashes too much with KDE. -- Neil Bothwick Self-explanatory: technospeak for Incomprehensible undocumented signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
Neil Bothwick writes: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:14:22 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote: The cruelty is actually worse: the machines that will benefit most from an OOo compile from source, are those old, low memory, asthmatic boxen, that take two days to complete the emerge! I am tempted to start cross-compiling. I've often used distcc between amd64 and x86 machines, for example, and had no problems (except that not enough is farmed out). Uh, really? I thought I had to setup cross compiling for that. Cool, I can skip that then. You just saved me a lot of trouble, thanks. AFAIR the OOo build won't use distcc. It used to take up to 16 hours on my iBook, with no bin package available. Now it takes 3-4 hours, so runs while I sleep. The binary version clashes too much with KDE. Looking at the ebuild is seems that it disables paralles makes, unless environment variable WANT_MP is set to true. So, I think distcc should work, using the first of the hosts given with distcc-config --set-hosts. Wonko -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Iain Buchanan wrote: On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 01:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Ahem. 'scuse me: I have 5.5G for /var/tmp Wanna guess why? well, this is Gentoo, so compile X where X=any damn large enough package probably still fits :) Openoffice for example? spot on :-) It's a throwback to the days when I DID compile OOo. Then one day I got a clue and found openoffice-bin. Building from source is cool. Building OOo yourself is just cruel. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 14 February 2008, Iain Buchanan wrote: On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 01:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Ahem. 'scuse me: I have 5.5G for /var/tmp Wanna guess why? well, this is Gentoo, so compile X where X=any damn large enough package probably still fits :) Openoffice for example? spot on :-) It's a throwback to the days when I DID compile OOo. Then one day I got a clue and found openoffice-bin. Building from source is cool. Building OOo yourself is just cruel. The cruelty is actually worse: the machines that will benefit most from an OOo compile from source, are those old, low memory, asthmatic boxen, that take two days to complete the emerge! I am tempted to start cross-compiling. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
sorry to hijack the thread even further... On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 23:04 +, Mick wrote: On Thursday 14 February 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 14 February 2008, Iain Buchanan wrote: On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 01:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Ahem. 'scuse me: I have 5.5G for /var/tmp Wanna guess why? well, this is Gentoo, so compile X where X=any damn large enough package probably still fits :) Openoffice for example? spot on :-) It's a throwback to the days when I DID compile OOo. Then one day I got a clue and found openoffice-bin. Building from source is cool. Building OOo yourself is just cruel. The cruelty is actually worse: the machines that will benefit most from an OOo compile from source, are those old, low memory, asthmatic boxen, that take two days to complete the emerge! I am tempted to start cross-compiling. I've often used distcc between amd64 and x86 machines, for example, and had no problems (except that not enough is farmed out). cya, -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au Voiceless it cries, Wingless flutters, Toothless bites, Mouthless mutters. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Wednesday 13 February 2008, James wrote: James R. Campbell jamesc at reliant-data.com writes: What processes have the most on cpu time as reported by a 'ps ax' ? not certain what your are asking. Here is the result of ps ax: He probably meant 'ps axu' -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Tuesday 12 February 2008, James wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes: One of the workstations (amd64 2gig ram) has a load that never drops below 1.0, as seen by top. Looking at a ps nothing stands out. I did notice that 'X' is at the top of the list, even when the machine is quiescent (nobody doing anything). Suspiciaous. Clearly I have a run away or hidden process using resources. Although all my system run kde 3.5.8 only one shows this problem. vmstat is your friend here. It's all in the man page, so use it and narrow down the process that's blocking. Maybe you have a threading race condition or similar. # vmstat procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io -system-- cpu r b swpd free buff cache si sobibo in cs us sy id wa 0 0 0 847368 224736 4034040026 12 172 251 1 0 98 1 According to this, that machine is sitting there doing nothing. So I see two maybe three possibilities: uptime and top are talking shit (happens way more often than one might assume) your machine is indeed hacked and trojaned, but the script kiddie forgot to upload a modified top and uptime (highly unlikely - someone who knows to replace vmstat will certainly replace top and uptime) your kernel scheduler has a bizarre view of life. This is most likely, I'd say you have a collection of settings that cause the kernel to collect it's utilization stats at precisely the moment when it really does do something useful. I saw someone rag poor Ingo two months back on lkml with a similar thing. Turns out the user was right. What are your relevant settings of things like: cpu scheduler (not i/o scheduler) timer freq tickless kernel? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
how about cron jobs like updatedb? Is there any disk activity? -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au tigah_- i have 4gb for /tmp Knghtbrd What do you do with 4G /tmp? Compile X? tigah_- yes -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Thursday 14 February 2008, Iain Buchanan wrote: how about cron jobs like updatedb? Is there any disk activity? -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au tigah_- i have 4gb for /tmp Knghtbrd What do you do with 4G /tmp? Compile X? tigah_- yes Ahem. 'scuse me: I have 5.5G for /var/tmp Wanna guess why? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 01:20 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 14 February 2008, Iain Buchanan wrote: how about cron jobs like updatedb? Is there any disk activity? -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au tigah_- i have 4gb for /tmp Knghtbrd What do you do with 4G /tmp? Compile X? tigah_- yes Ahem. 'scuse me: I have 5.5G for /var/tmp Wanna guess why? well, this is Gentoo, so compile X where X=any damn large enough package probably still fits :) Openoffice for example? cya, -- Iain Buchanan iaindb at netspace dot net dot au Of all men's miseries, the bitterest is this: to know so much and have control over nothing. -- Herodotus -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: load too high
Any ideas? No.But do you also see this without X running, without most daemons running, in single user mode...?
