On 5/12/23 20:08, Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Saturday, 13 May 2023 00:53:49 BST Mark Knecht wrote:
Anyway, I had a couple of thoughts:
1) If it's really a bug then as others have said report it up the
chain and hope for a fix.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/905933
2) If I wanted to solve the problem today(ish) then I'd build
a Gentoo VM in Virtualbox, dedicate some number of cores
to it, build everything with binary packages and probably
run an NFS server in the VM which I mount in the host
machine. I then update the host machine from the binary
packages and Virtualbox manages to never use more cores
than I give it. That fix is more or less guaranteed to work.
Sounds like a lot of work. :(
A new thought on an easier test. With -j any higher than 1, doesn't
emerge put out a fairly constant stream of how many out of how many jobs
are complete, how many are currently running, and the load average? If
it launches new jobs when it's own display of load average is above what
you set, that should be pretty compelling to the developers.
3) As a question for the far more knowledgeable system
folks I'd ask "Can this problem be solved by cgroups?" If
I have a cgroup with 10 processors in it, can I start emerge
in the host environment and then just transfer the emerge
process ID to a cgroup that I've set up for this purpose?
Isn't that what cgroups is supposed to be used for?
Interesting idea, that.
Anyway, just thoughts.
All grist to the mill...
