Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On 2019/11/14 10:26, Solene Rapenne wrote: > any other people noticed a difference with the priority change? Can't tell if it has affected bulk builds, between bugs being committed and some changes to ports/packages that would affect build times it's hard to say. Maybe when the dust has settled I'll try some builds with/without and see if I can notice anything.
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 02:38:52PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:35:28PM +0100, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 01:18:53PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > On 2019/11/01 19:16, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > Ted Unangst wrote: > > > > > > > > > Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > > > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. > > > > > > > > > > The same then for src build user? > > > > > > > > Well, that's different. Most of us building the src tree are waiting > > > > eagerly for it to finish aren't we? > > > > > > That's the same for ports building! > > > > > > > if you don't do anything else than compiling ports, that shouldn't be > > slower. > > If you are doing something else (GUI user, web server, community server > > with people connected doing IRC) , then you don't get angry due to > > unresponsive system. > > > > Lowering staff priority would only help the one user case. > > I agree with solene on that one. > > This is actually useful even if you're just building ports, because > you get a more responsive text-editor and stuff like that which is useful > when you're fixing things that broke while dpb is still going. > > I see a noticeable difference in vim showing me syntax coloring correctly > while dpb is running. > > Source is somewhat different. make build/release is sequential by nature, > as you can't really fix a part while something else is still building. > any other people noticed a difference with the priority change?
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:35:28PM +0100, Solene Rapenne wrote: > On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 01:18:53PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2019/11/01 19:16, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > Ted Unangst wrote: > > > > > > > Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > > > > > > > > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. > > > > > > > > The same then for src build user? > > > > > > Well, that's different. Most of us building the src tree are waiting > > > eagerly for it to finish aren't we? > > > > That's the same for ports building! > > > > if you don't do anything else than compiling ports, that shouldn't be > slower. > If you are doing something else (GUI user, web server, community server > with people connected doing IRC) , then you don't get angry due to > unresponsive system. > > Lowering staff priority would only help the one user case. I agree with solene on that one. This is actually useful even if you're just building ports, because you get a more responsive text-editor and stuff like that which is useful when you're fixing things that broke while dpb is still going. I see a noticeable difference in vim showing me syntax coloring correctly while dpb is running. Source is somewhat different. make build/release is sequential by nature, as you can't really fix a part while something else is still building.
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 01:18:53PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2019/11/01 19:16, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > Ted Unangst wrote: > > > > > Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > > > > > > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. > > > > > > The same then for src build user? > > > > Well, that's different. Most of us building the src tree are waiting > > eagerly for it to finish aren't we? > > That's the same for ports building! > if you don't do anything else than compiling ports, that shouldn't be slower. If you are doing something else (GUI user, web server, community server with people connected doing IRC) , then you don't get angry due to unresponsive system. Lowering staff priority would only help the one user case.
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On 2019/11/01 19:16, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Ted Unangst wrote: > > > Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > > > > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. > > > > The same then for src build user? > > Well, that's different. Most of us building the src tree are waiting > eagerly for it to finish aren't we? That's the same for ports building!
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
Ted Unangst wrote: > Theo de Raadt wrote: > > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. > > The same then for src build user? Well, that's different. Most of us building the src tree are waiting eagerly for it to finish aren't we?
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
Theo de Raadt wrote: > What about all the other users who aren't in staff? > > I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down. The same then for src build user?
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2019/11/01 23:32, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 10:06:48PM -, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > > > On 2019-10-31, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > > > > > > I suggest adding a priority=5 to _pbuild user. > > > > > > Is this the right place? Or should dpb do this? > > > > > > -- > > > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de > > > > > > > using the _pbuild class it applies for package building using make and > > also when using dpb (which uses make). I don't understand why it should > > be handled by dpb. > > > > Building ports isn't the only thing that places demands on the system > that can result in slow interactive behaviour. If working around this > via priority in login.conf is considered acceptable (I don't like it > much myself..) would it be better to make the default class lower- > priority and set e.g. staff to something higher? What about all the other users who aren't in staff? I think the approach is right. Push non-interactive down.
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On 2019/11/01 23:32, Solene Rapenne wrote: > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 10:06:48PM -, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > > On 2019-10-31, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > > > > I suggest adding a priority=5 to _pbuild user. > > > > Is this the right place? Or should dpb do this? > > > > -- > > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de > > > > using the _pbuild class it applies for package building using make and > also when using dpb (which uses make). I don't understand why it should > be handled by dpb. > Building ports isn't the only thing that places demands on the system that can result in slow interactive behaviour. If working around this via priority in login.conf is considered acceptable (I don't like it much myself..) would it be better to make the default class lower- priority and set e.g. staff to something higher?
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 10:06:48PM -, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > On 2019-10-31, Solene Rapenne wrote: > > > I suggest adding a priority=5 to _pbuild user. > > Is this the right place? Or should dpb do this? > > -- > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de > using the _pbuild class it applies for package building using make and also when using dpb (which uses make). I don't understand why it should be handled by dpb.
Re: _pbuild user to have priority=5
On 2019-10-31, Solene Rapenne wrote: > I suggest adding a priority=5 to _pbuild user. Is this the right place? Or should dpb do this? -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
_pbuild user to have priority=5
I suggest adding a priority=5 to _pbuild user. I tried on a macppc, a core 2 duo laptop and i7 laptop. It helped a lot the macppc and core2 to stay responsive on ssh or being barely usable while building. On the i7, the benefits are less. At best this allows firefox to stay responsive on bloated "webapps" and avoid a few audio stuttering. I only see benefits and no drawback. Index: etc.alpha/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.alpha/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -p -r1.7 login.conf --- etc.alpha/login.conf2 Jun 2019 06:46:17 - 1.7 +++ etc.alpha/login.conf31 Oct 2019 22:34:15 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=1024M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.amd64/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.amd64/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -p -r1.12 login.conf --- etc.amd64/login.conf19 Aug 2019 20:59:14 - 1.12 +++ etc.amd64/login.conf31 Oct 2019 22:34:20 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=6144M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=384:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.arm64/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.arm64/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -p -r1.6 login.conf --- etc.arm64/login.conf7 Oct 2019 17:52:59 - 1.6 +++ etc.arm64/login.conf31 Oct 2019 22:34:24 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=6144M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=384:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.armv7/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.armv7/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -p -r1.7 login.conf --- etc.armv7/login.conf2 Jun 2019 06:46:17 - 1.7 +++ etc.armv7/login.conf31 Oct 2019 22:34:27 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=1024M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.hppa/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.hppa/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.9 diff -u -p -r1.9 login.conf --- etc.hppa/login.conf 2 Jun 2019 06:46:17 - 1.9 +++ etc.hppa/login.conf 31 Oct 2019 22:34:31 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=1024M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.i386/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.i386/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.8 diff -u -p -r1.8 login.conf --- etc.i386/login.conf 2 Jun 2019 06:46:18 - 1.8 +++ etc.i386/login.conf 31 Oct 2019 22:34:36 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=2048M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.landisk/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.landisk/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -p -r1.7 login.conf --- etc.landisk/login.conf 2 Jun 2019 06:46:18 - 1.7 +++ etc.landisk/login.conf 31 Oct 2019 22:34:39 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=1024M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.loongson/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.loongson/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.9 diff -u -p -r1.9 login.conf --- etc.loongson/login.conf 18 Oct 2019 03:40:22 - 1.9 +++ etc.loongson/login.conf 31 Oct 2019 22:34:42 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=4096M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.luna88k/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.luna88k/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -p -r1.7 login.conf --- etc.luna88k/login.conf 2 Jun 2019 06:46:18 - 1.7 +++ etc.luna88k/login.conf 31 Oct 2019 22:34:45 - @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ pbuild:\ :datasize-cur=1024M:\ :maxproc-max=1024:\ :maxproc-cur=256:\ + :priority=5:\ :tc=default: # Index: etc.macppc/login.conf === RCS file: /data/cvs/src/etc/etc.macppc/login.conf,v retrieving revision 1.8 diff -u -p -r1.8 login.conf --- etc.macppc/login.conf 2 Jun 2019 06:46:18 -
