On Feb 23, 2020, at 06:08, Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think we should do both: the lilypond runs in lp-book should be > protected by some sort of lock, and we should use both CPU_COUNT=M and > -jN. > > then worst case, you have M lilypond processes and N-1 other jobs.
What would you recommend to a developer who doesn't want to run more than J = M + N - 1 concurrent jobs due to lilypond development? What values of M and N would serve best? On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 12:00 PM <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > So wouldn't it appear that the way to exploit parallelism with > lilypond-book, short of writing its own jobserver, is to use CPU_COUNT > like we did before? Making lilypond-book a client of the GNU make job server sounds like an option. "Sharing Job Slots with GNU make" https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Job-Slots.html Examples (good or bad? I haven't looked): "Add GNU make jobserver client support" https://github.com/ninja-build/ninja/pull/1140 "Add a GNU make jobserver implementation to Cargo" https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/4110 — Dan
