Hi,
On Sat, 08 Jan 2011 18:48:00 +0700, Landry Breuil
<landry.bre...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Ted Unangst <ted.unan...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Christian Weisgerber
<na...@mips.inka.de>
wrote:
I guess Landry doesn't read this list, or he could tell you how his
experiment with parallel ports building on a 64-way sparc64 T2 went.
With 32 build jobs it looked like this:
<landry_p22> 0.8%Int 48.9%Sys 6.0%Usr 0.0%Nic 44.3%Idle
<landry_p22> around that all the time
My understanding is that the T2 is closer to an 8-way machine. If we
could recognize the real cores and balance appropriately, 8 build jobs
shouldn't be too bad.
At least with a 4-core 8-thread i7 processor, make -j 8 scales
reasonably
well.
In that particular case, dpb jobs are a bit different than just
running 'make -j'.
It's more like "oh let's build XX ports at the same time", which is a
perfect
stresstest for smp.
32 Build jobs made the machine totally unusable (load was constant around
40/45 iirc), so far i've settled for 12 jobs, which spawns approx ~50/60
make
processes in parallel (a single port build spawns 4/5 makes), more or
less
the
same amount of shells, and smth like ~20 ssh process as it's the dpb
master
node.
Load is constant around 20, and the machine is still 'responsive'.
I have a SMP -i386 current that runs "make build" with -j switch that
still forwarding 1Mpps packet, systat -i and bgpd. ssh and other works
just normal. It's a Xeon 3110 Machine.
227 processes: 210 idle, 17 on processor
All CPUs: 5.8% user, 0.0% nice, 16.9% system, 0.8% interrupt, 76.5%
idle
Landry
Thanks,
Insan Praja
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
