Seth Arnold wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 09:02:18PM -0800, John Johansen wrote: > > This check is well above the range of values I would recommend (some > > where between 1-2x the number of cpus. More jobs can help with smaller > > Two times makes more sense for most CPUs but eight may be more appropriate > for e.g. POWER8 systems; I don't know if the online CPUs count includes > only cores or if the hardware threads are reported too. If only cores, > then even eight might be low for those beasts but if threads are reported > too, this might be high for even them. But _some_ limit is certainly best, > and this is as good a starting point as any inthe absense of data. > > Thanks
i thought arbitrary limits based on no data that are imposed on users by programmers were generally considered to be a bad idea (at least by the GNU people, anyway). if there's doubt, why not just let the user determine what works well on their system and what doesn't? just a thought. cheers, raf -- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
