On Thu, 12 Mar 2015 23:20:27 +0100 Heinz Diehl <htd+ml@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It depends on the machine used and the amount of processes. > While cgroups limit more than just CPU power, you could > try with BFS (which does not use cgroups). > > http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/bfs/3.0/3.19/ > Thanks for this. After reading the bfs documentation, I was going to turn off cgroups in the kernel, but that seems to be disallowed in the config file. When I tried his patch for bfs, I got some rejected hunks, so I'll probably have to tweak it. But his rationale for his technique fits my use case just fine. I think the main load balancer is designed for a system being pounded by asynchronous requests i.e. a server, though it works just fine for regular desktop usage as well. If it is cgroups, I should be able to set up my own cgroup, put it in cgroup_other so it is outside the purview of selinux, set usage limits to be all cpu cores for my group, and then attach my compile jobs to that cgroup in order to get access to all cpu available. I think it will be a lot easier to get the bfs patch working for 4.0. If I come up with a solution, I'll post back in this thread, but otherwise I think I've whipped this horse enough. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
