Ludovic CourtÃs wrote:
Hello, There was recently discussion as to how configure could be parallelized. I ran a series of build time measurements on a 32-core machine, with make -jX, with X in [1..32], and the results are available at:
It's been my experience that compile-oriented builds tend to be I/O bound and generally have excess CPU capacity in the range of 30-40%. As such I always use make -jX where X is number of cores * 1.5, which tends to keep the idle CPU percentage below 5%.
http://hubble.gforge.inria.fr/parallel-builds.html There are also insightful per-package details: http://hubble.gforge.inria.fr/parallel-build-details.html There are packages whose configuration phase is noticeably longer than the build time.
Yes. I've seen several projects where the autotool files are larger than the actual program source code. IMO, any time your build overhead takes up more than 1% of your total project size, you've done something wrong.
OTOH, packages with a long build time (with a sequential time in boldface) donât scale well either, but that is not configureâs fault.
If only more people would learn to write proper Makefile dependencies... http://highlandsun.com/hyc/#Make -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/ _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
