On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 11:44 AM Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> wrote: > and initially it is working as expected (4 cpus.) > > 11:12:40 3.23 Making Documentation/out-www/music-glossary.pdf < texi > 11:12:41 3.30 Making Documentation/out-www/notation.pdf < texi > 11:12:47 3.43 Making Documentation/out-www/snippets.pdf < texi > > but later in the process, I get > > 11:17:54 2.07 Making Documentation/de/out-www/notation.pdf < texi > .. > 11:18:46 1.85 Making Documentation/es/out-www/notation.texi < tely > 11:19:25 2.51 Making Documentation/es/out-www/learning.texi < tely > > ie. the build process for other languages is leaving ~2 CPUs idle, for > about 15 minutes. This means it should be doable to shave off 7.5 > minutes off the make doc build.
I should have taken more detailed notes on the first runtime. I tried some more work with parallelization, which yields an overall runtime of 36m, which shows that I haven't been able to disprove David. It's a ~5 min improvement. Probably we should look more deeply into making lp-book not be exclusive. 15:17:11 2.73 Making Documentation/de/out-www/learning.pdf < texi 15:17:17 2.91 Making Documentation/de/out-www/notation.pdf < texi .. 15:18:13 2.26 Making Documentation/es/out-www/learning.texi < tely 15:18:14 2.26 Making Documentation/es/out-www/notation.texi < tely real 36m12.256s user 79m24.432s sys 10m36.464s For posterity, during the lp-book processing for doc/web, lilypond is busy at about 40%. The rest presumably goes to ghostscript and image scaling. Compared to just the regtests, that is 2.5x more files and 2.5x more expensive processing = 6x more expensive overall. Since the regtest completes in about 3 minutes, the equivalent for "make doc" would be 18 mins. So we still are missing a factor two. It looks like the poor parallelism of the build process can explain that remaining factor. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanw...@gmail.com - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen