Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 16:19:38 +0200 (MEST) From: Michiel Boland <michiel@boland.org> To: Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gcc memory consumption: amd64 v i386 Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0705261614220.15153@neerbosch.nijmegen.internl.net> In-Reply-To: <b41c75520705260230h3a0e2050s7d652e7070aa528f@mail.gmail.com> References: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0705252135230.2140@neerbosch.nijmegen.internl.net> <b41c75520705260230h3a0e2050s7d652e7070aa528f@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Hi. I noticed that compilation of xorg-server on i386 with the new gcc >> proceeds normally, whereas compilation on amd64 would crash because the >> compiler would consume all memory. The i386 and amd64 boxen have the same >> amount of RAM and swap, obviously. And they run, give or take a few hours, >> more or less same version of -CURRENT. > > It does not crash if you have enough swap. I have 2 GB swap and it > proceeded fine after some swapping. The point I was trying to make (although perhaps not clearly enough) is that there is no reason that a trivial source file takes up such a huge amount of memory to compile. Especially since gcc 3.4.6 does not blow up like that. If every new gcc version means I have to readjust the amount of memory in my box, I guess I'll pass the next time a gcc upgrade happens. This is not what I would call progress. Anyway, I will get back under my stone now. :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0705261614220.15153>