Re: Apparent performance regression 8.3@ -> 8.4@r255966?

2013-10-07 Thread David Wolfskill
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:19:38PM +0200, Erik Cederstrand wrote: > ... > > In examining the CPU utilization graphs, the CPU generally looks > > about 5% busy for the first 15 minutes; this would be bmake determining > > dependency graphs, I expect. > > Is that one process using 100% of one core,

Re: Apparent performance regression 8.3@ -> 8.4@r255966?

2013-10-07 Thread Erik Cederstrand
Den 07/10/2013 kl. 19.28 skrev David Wolfskill : > In examining the CPU utilization graphs, the CPU generally looks > about 5% busy for the first 15 minutes; this would be bmake determining > dependency graphs, I expect. Is that one process using 100% of one core, or many processes using 5% tota

Re: Apparent performance regression 8.3@ -> 8.4@r255966?

2013-10-07 Thread David Wolfskill
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:32:57AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On Oct 7, 2013 1:28 PM, "David Wolfskill" wrote: > > > > At work, we have a bunch of machines that developers use to build some > > software. The machines presently run FreeBSD/amd64 8.3-STABLE @rxx > > (with a few local patches,

Re: Apparent performance regression 8.3@ -> 8.4@r255966?

2013-10-07 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Oct 7, 2013 1:28 PM, "David Wolfskill" wrote: > > At work, we have a bunch of machines that developers use to build some > software. The machines presently run FreeBSD/amd64 8.3-STABLE @rxx > (with a few local patches, which have since been committed to stable/8), > and the software is bui

Apparent performance regression 8.3@ -> 8.4@r255966?

2013-10-07 Thread David Wolfskill
At work, we have a bunch of machines that developers use to build some software. The machines presently run FreeBSD/amd64 8.3-STABLE @rxx (with a few local patches, which have since been committed to stable/8), and the software is built within a 32-bit jail. The hardware includes 2 packages o