On 2 Nov., 15:39, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, November 2, 2011 5:33:15 AM UTC-7, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
Important question: If I set
MAKE=make -j6
could it be that I get 36 processes in a parallel build? 6 packages in
parallel and 6 jobs per package? Or
On 2 Nov., 15:52, leif not.rea...@online.de wrote:
As mentioned elsewhere (ticket / sage-support?), this only works
properly if the communication to the (main) jobserver isn't broken,
which obviously currently isn't the case for all spkgs.
Note that 'make' communicates through inherited file
On Oct 27, 1:14 pm, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
The option to build spkg's in Sage in parallel has been available for quite
a while now, but it has to be enabled by setting the shell variable
SAGE_PARALLEL_SPKG_BUILD equal to yes. Should we change the default,
building in
On Thursday, October 27, 2011 10:29:37 AM UTC-7, kcrisman wrote:
On Oct 27, 1:14 pm, John H Palmieri jhpalm...@gmail.com wrote:
The option to build spkg's in Sage in parallel has been available for
quite
a while now, but it has to be enabled by setting the shell variable
On Thursday, October 27, 2011 12:28:00 PM UTC-7, kcrisman wrote:
As it turns out, trying the wrong behavior (make -j2 with parallel
spkgs) on one of my one processor machines does lead to unusual build
failures which seem to have to do with waiting for jobs. And then it
finishes the next
On 27 Okt., 20:43, Jeroen Demeyer jdeme...@cage.ugent.be wrote:
Even better solution: make the SAGE_PARALLEL_SPKG_BUILD=yes behaviour
the default and *remove the environment variabele*.
+1
There is absolutely
no reason why anybody would need to set SAGE_PARALLEL_SPKG_BUILD=no.
Simply set
On 27 Okt., 21:28, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
As it turns out, trying the wrong behavior (make -j2 with parallel
spkgs) on one of my one processor machines does lead to unusual build
failures which seem to have to do with waiting for jobs. And then it
finishes the next spkg before
On 27 Okt., 22:17, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, in my
preliminary patches, I'm adding a warning about using make -j2 on
machines with one processor.
Until it died :( I used to build Sage on a single-core Pentium4 (very
similar to Cicero, but with only 768MB RAM) with
On Thursday, October 27, 2011 2:15:34 PM UTC-7, leif wrote:
P.S.: Incidentally I also posted about parallel make on sage-support
today:
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/msg/a17f6e561583e1a5
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/msg/f4d0c2e3815f1157
Yes, hence my
On 27 Okt., 23:15, leif not.rea...@online.de wrote:
On 27 Okt., 22:17, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, in my
preliminary patches, I'm adding a warning about using make -j2 on
machines with one processor.
Until it died :( I used to build Sage on a single-core
Okay, a patch is up. See
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11959
If people have objections to the whole plan, please keep them here. If you
have issues with the particular implementation, let's discuss that on the
ticket.
--
John
--
To post to this group, send an email to
11 matches
Mail list logo
