On Wednesday, 13 September 2023 12:50:20 BST Wols Lists wrote: > On 13/09/2023 12:28, Peter Humphrey wrote: > > A thought on compiling, which I hope some devs will read: I was tempted to > > push the system hard at first, with load average and jobs as high as I > > thought I could set them. I've come to believe, though, that job control > > by portage and /usr/bin/make is weak at very high loads, because I would > > usually find that a few packages had failed to compile; also that some > > complex programs were sometimes unstable. Therefore I've had to throttle > > the system to be sure(r) of correctness. Seems a waste.
> Bear in mind a lot of systems are thermally limited and can't run at > full pelt anyway ... No doubt, but apparently not this box: I run it 24x7 with all 24 CPU threads fully loaded with floating-point calculations, which make a good deal more heat than 'mere' compiling with (I assume) integer arithmetic. :) > You might find it's actually better (and more efficient) to run at lower > loading. Certainly following the kernel lists you get the impression > that the CPU regularly goes into thermal throttling under heavy load, > and also that using a couple of cores lightly is more efficient than > using one core heavily. See above; besides, I have to limit the load anyway when compiling, for the reasons I gave last time. > It's so difficult to know what's best ... (because too many people make > decisions based on their interests, and then when you come along their > decisions may conflict with each other and certainly conflict with you ...) I agree with you there Wol, even without the parenthesis. :) -- Regards, Peter.
