Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 22:52:04 -0500 From: "Chris Csanady" <ccsanady@friley216.res.iastate.edu> To: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@freefall.freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make -j# Message-ID: <199610140352.WAA03987@friley216.res.iastate.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 13 Oct 1996 17:46:37 -0700. <199610140046.RAA14663@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Peter Wemm wrote: >> >> I find that using -pipe is a better overall option for a single-cpu compile. >> When I set in /etc/make.conf: >> CFLAGS= -O -pipe >> COPTFLAGS= -O -pipe >> .. I find that a simple 'make' is faster than any setting of -j# .. >> >> This is probably more dependent on the machine in question than anything, >> including things like cache speed, ram speed, disk speed and architecture >> (ie: scsi vs. ide etc). >> >> I found that the job-complete polling was too chunky though, It seemed that >> make was taking up to half a second to start a new job after the last one >> had finished. Dropping one of the select timeout parameters from 500000 >> usec to 50000 usec made a lot of difference, but it still wasn't quite as >> quick as simply -pipe. >> >> However, on the smp kernel it certainly is nice! :-) > >Peter, > how much faster is make work on an smp box than on the > same box running only one processor? how much of a boost > are we getting at this point? FWIW, these are the respective times on my box. I only bother because its such a pleasure to see progress. :) Chris Csanady make -O2 -pipe -j3 528.404u 74.618s 5:39.12 177.8% 483+723k 1232+2119io 169pf+0w make -O2 -pipe 560.248u 65.277s 10:27.07 99.7% 482+717k 850+652io 68pf+0w > > if i had a multiprocessor box, i would know without asking ;( >jmb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610140352.WAA03987>