Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:51:32AM +, Fernando Meira wrote: I have a P4-2.4GHz laptop. I forgot to say that the estimation time was made by genlop. And was quite wrong! It took something like 11h to compile 112 packages, (though I've interrupted while compiling gcc-3.3.6.. so it had to restart it anew). From this, I don't know if I should trust genlop anymore.. or is there something to configure so that it is more accurate? Just for the record, the migration to gcc-3.4.4 went just fine.. until now at least. :) hum. Genlop looks at the past emerge times of the packages, calculates an average based on that. The one thing genlop can't do is figure out how long it takes to merge new packages. So it just skips them. That is the only way I see genlop being wrong by so much. (The other possibility is that you were running the box with a high load WHILE compiling, though I guess you won't be complaining if that were the case.) To be honest, I've found the genlop time quite reliable... I've rebuilt my systems with --emptytree a few times in the past 6 months. (Once after killing PAM and LDAP, once after changing to hardened, once after changing from ~x86 to x86, and once after a major rehaul of my USE flags; these are on my desktop machine only). The 500 or so packages came up to be 1 day and 15 hours from genlop. The actual compiles never took more than 2 days, and that was while the computer was still in use. Once it actually finished before the estimated time. Do note that, however, genlop can only calculate its merge time based on past averages. So if you made major changes to your system, or if the codebase changed significantly upstream, genlop can be completely wrong. For example, looking at past emerges of glibc, I see the compile time goes from everything between 28 minutes to 3 hours. genlop tells me that if I were to remerge glibc it would take me 1 hour and 9 minutes. But I know from experience if I were to install 2.3.5-r1, it will most likely only take me 40 minutes, and if I were to compile glibc-2.3.4.20050125-r1, it will take me about 2 hour and 10 minutes. Why the funky discrepancy I don't know. So I think that while genlop is generally rather reliable for a rough idea on how long I need to wait for the compile (i.e. is it worth it just sitting here reading a book or should I just go to bed), the numbers it give should be taken with a grain of salt if you don't have a large number of history of emerges for it to base its guesses on. W -- Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. - Some wisdom from The Book. Sortir en Pantoufles: up 13 days, 18:42 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4
On 8/25/05, Willie Wong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:51:32AM +, Fernando Meira wrote: I have a P4-2.4GHz laptop. I forgot to say that the estimation time was made by genlop. And was quite wrong! It took something like 11h to compile 112 packages, (though I've interrupted while compiling gcc-3.3.6.. so it had to restart it anew). From this, I don't know if I should trust genlop anymore.. or is there something to configure so that it is more accurate? Just for the record, the migration to gcc-3.4.4 went just fine.. until now at least. :)hum. Genlop looks at the past emerge times of the packages, calculatesan average based on that. The one thing genlop can't do is figure out how long it takes to mergenew packages. So it just skips them. That is the only way I see genlopbeing wrong by so much. (The other possibility is that you wererunning the box with a high load WHILE compiling, though I guess you won't be complaining if that were the case.) That was not the case. I started emerge system just before going to bed, so it had all cpu for itself (considering that the remaining apps, such as X, and others, were not very active). I would say that most of the emerged packages were emerged before.. but maybe not that much so that genlop could be accurate. Also, a new compiler was being used.. no idea how much can that change the performance. To be honest, I've found the genlop time quite reliable... I'verebuilt my systems with --emptytree a few times in the past 6 months. (Once after killing PAM and LDAP, once after changing to hardened,once after changing from ~x86 to x86, and once after a major rehaul ofmy USE flags; these are on my desktop machine only). The 500 or sopackages came up to be 1 day and 15 hours from genlop. The actual compiles never took more than 2 days, and that was while the computerwas still in use. Once it actually finished before the estimated time.Do note that, however, genlop can only calculate its merge time based on past averages. So if you made major changes to your system, or ifthe codebase changed significantly upstream, genlop can be completelywrong. For example, looking at past emerges of glibc, I see thecompile time goes from everything between 28 minutes to 3 hours. genlop tells me that if I were to remerge glibc it would take me 1hour and 9 minutes. But I know from experience if I were to install2.3.5-r1, it will most likely only take me 40 minutes, and if I wereto compile glibc-2.3.4.20050125-r1, it will take me about 2 hour and10 minutes. Why the funky discrepancy I don't know. So I think thatwhile genlop is generally rather reliable for a rough idea on how longI need to wait for the compile ( i.e. is it worth it just sitting herereading a book or should I just go to bed), the numbers it give shouldbe taken with a grain of salt if you don't have a large number ofhistory of emerges for it to base its guesses on. W Ok.. so I'll get better estimations the more times I update my system. Great!! That was in fact the first time I've used genlop. It's quite interesting to be able to predict how much something will take to emerge. For what you said, is it worth it just sitting here reading a book or should I just go to bed, would it be possible to check an active emerge for the estimated time left? That would tell you what you should do... does genlop do that? Cheers, Fernando
Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:33:14PM +, Fernando Meira wrote: I would say that most of the emerged packages were emerged before.. but maybe not that much so that genlop could be accurate. Also, a new compiler was being used.. no idea how much can that change the performance. That might. -shrug- Ok.. so I'll get better estimations the more times I update my system. Genlop actually just monitors /var/log/emerge.log and the estimated times comes from, as I said, averaging the times from past emerges. So you don't really need to have genlop installed before hand or used it before for it to gather data. Great!! That was in fact the first time I've used genlop. It's quite interesting to be able to predict how much something will take to emerge. It's like weather prediction: you will be 80% correct if you guess the weather tomorrow is the same as today. Same spirit with genlop. For what you said, is it worth it just sitting here reading a book or should I just go to bed, would it be possible to check an active emerge for the estimated time left? That would tell you what you should do... does genlop do that? Technically, genlop -c should show the currently compiling package and estimate time left. (And if it has been compiling longer than the average time, it would say: Any Time Now.) BUT!!! It seems that there is a bug with genlop and newer versions of portage because some issues with a sandbox lockfile. Search for genlop sandbox on bugs.gentoo.org for more info. In any case, for the time being, until the bug is fixed, genlop -c will never detect an active emerge. So that's too bad. Though... if you are talking about, for example, emerge world, then genlop won't be able to tell you how long until EVERYTHING is done. It can give you an estimate on how long it will be until the current compiling package is done. W -- I assume you've all done stationary phase integrals...right? ~DeathMech, S. Sondhi. P-town PHY 205 Sortir en Pantoufles: up 13 days, 21:48 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:51:33 -0400, Willie Wong wrote: BUT!!! It seems that there is a bug with genlop and newer versions of portage because some issues with a sandbox lockfile. Search for genlop sandbox on bugs.gentoo.org for more info. In any case, for the time being, until the bug is fixed, genlop -c will never detect an active emerge. So that's too bad. That's been fixed. The latest release - 0.30.5 - works with the new sandbox and genlop --current is back. -- Neil Bothwick I stayed up all night playing poker with tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died. pgp2zxHnqtk7e.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] genlop times was: migrating to gcc-3.4.4
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:03:47PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:51:33 -0400, Willie Wong wrote: BUT!!! It seems that there is a bug with genlop and newer versions of portage because some issues with a sandbox lockfile. Search for genlop sandbox on bugs.gentoo.org for more info. In any case, for the time being, until the bug is fixed, genlop -c will never detect an active emerge. So that's too bad. That's been fixed. The latest release - 0.30.5 - works with the new sandbox and genlop --current is back. Thanks! Now time to emerge sync... W -- This one's a bitummm...graphic? Lagrangian Mechanics with Differential Equations is like masturbating. You do what works and what makes you feel good. ~DeathMech, Some Student. P-town PHY 205 Sortir en Pantoufles: up 14 days, 2:15 -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
