Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 20:48:13 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>, olli hauer <ohauer@gmx.de>, Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Torsten Zuehlsdorff <mailinglists@toco-domains.de> Subject: Re: Poudriere MFS support [was Re: Poudriere Timeout] Message-ID: <54C36A5D.1090002@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54C18027.7050002@FreeBSD.org> References: <201501190145.t0J1jKvg006268@slippy.cwsent.com> <54BCF7C9.7090502@toco-domains.de> <20150119154822.GX44537@home.opsec.eu> <54BD3203.5050809@toco-domains.de> <20150119191834.GH83169@home.opsec.eu> <54BD5EF8.4010201@gmx.de> <54C18027.7050002@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23/01/2015 9:56 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 1/19/2015 1:46 PM, olli hauer wrote: >> On 2015-01-19 20:18, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>>>>> Yes, i have. I've solved this problem by moving the build-jails of >>>>>> poudriere to an memory disk. This make poudriere no longer io-bund and >>>>>> incredibly fast. And solve this issue ;) >>> >>>>> How did you do this ? I want to try this myself 8-} >>> >>>> I've hacked poudriere to run within a jail. >>> >>> Aha, the .m mountpoint. My test host has 32 GB, so 20 GB should not be >>> a problem. >>> >>> Testport: www/p5-Selenium-Remote-Driver on 10.1-amd64, 9.3-amd64 and 8.4-i386. >>> >>> Results: >>> >>> old: 00:05:43 >>> new: 00:05:11 >>> >>> old: 00:01:56 >>> new: 00:00:12 >>> >>> old: 00:02:11 >>> new: 00:00:14 >>> >>> Nice! >>> >> >> Hi Kurt, >> >> are you running PD also in a jail? >> >> If not PD can be tuned by setting MFSSIZE *or* USE_TMPFS in poudriere.conf. >> >> On my system I have good results with 8 concurrent builds and MFSSIZE=6G or 'USE_TMPFS=all'. >> Fine tuning can be done with an additional SSD (look at `systat -iostat' during a build) >> >> poudriere.conf: >> >> # When building packages, a memory device can be used to speedup the build. >> # Only one of MFSSIZE or USE_TMPFS is supported. TMPFS is generally faster >> # and will expand to the needed amount of RAM. MFS is a bit slower, but is >> # more mature and can have its memory usage capped. >> >> # If set WRKDIRPREFIX will be mdmfs of the given size (mM or gG) >> #MFSSIZE=4G >> >> # Use tmpfs(5) >> ... >> # all - Run the entire build in memory, including builder jails. >> USE_TMPFS=all >> > > > Why do people pick MFS over TMPFS? I've found MFS/UFS significantly > slower than TMPFS on FreeBSD 10+. > > I'm very inclined to remove MFS support from Poudriere as it is far less > supported as TMPFS and not tested well. > > I suspect the reason is due to size constraint not being supported in > the past. TMPFS_LIMIT can be used just as MFSSIZE can be. > >From LOCALBASE/etc/poudriere.conf: MFS is a bit slower, but is more mature and can have its memory usage capped. This is why I chose it, in particular the memory cap. I'll switch back over to TMPFS and see how we go. ./koobs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54C36A5D.1090002>