From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Feb 12 22:36:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (winston.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.229]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F001437B491 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:36:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from winston.osd.bsdi.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.2/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1D6aeH81049; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:36:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com) To: kstewart@urx.com Cc: Danny Braniss , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: soft updates performance In-Reply-To: Message from Kent Stewart of "Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:44:25 PST." <3A889F89.8CDD507F@urx.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:36:40 -0800 Message-ID: <81045.982046200@winston.osd.bsdi.com> From: Jordan Hubbard Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > One other point that I would like to understand is why -j4 takes > longer on all of my systems. That goes against what everyone claims > should happen. With how many running processors? If you're running -j4 on a uniprocessor system, you're only introducing competition for already scarce CPU resources, though -j2 can be a speedup since this allows one target build to run while another is in an I/O wait. I've only seen a speedup with -j4 when using at least 2 CPUs. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message