[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ale] Performance
- Subject: [ale] Performance
- From: danscox at mindspring.com (Danny Cox)
- Date: Fri Nov 7 18:40:47 2003
- In-reply-to: <1068230657.28564.1225.camel@localhost>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <1068225279.28570.1219.camel@localhost> <[email protected]> <1068230657.28564.1225.camel@localhost>
Jeff,
On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 13:44, Jeff Hubbs wrote:
> OK, I read you - but regarding the "disk IO on all the small files," is
> this mostly a read operation or a write operation? Reason I ask, how
> would it be to leave at least the reading coming from disks on the
> individual Mosix nodes, from kernel trees set up via rsync ahead of
> time?
>
> When you did this, how did you establish the shared cluster file space?
> NFS? Mosix File System (something I need to look into again - it's been
> a while)?
Just for kicks, I made a RAM disk large enough to hold the kernel
source plus objects. This was on a dual Athlon 1.2 GHz with 1GB ram.
Made no difference, or perhaps I may recall a couple of seconds here or
there. Certainly down in the grass.
Fully 98% of the time compiling is full CPU. The I/O is negligable in
comparison. gcc -O2 comsumes lots of memory, but is also CPU
intensive. The best way to speed up compiles is a faster CPU, or, as
others have suggested, many fast CPUs, either via SMP, distcc, or both.
Now, if you do lots of "make clean; make" type work, check out ccache
(ccache.samba.org). It's the classic time/space tradeoff. Spiffy!
--
kernel, n.: A part of an operating system that preserves the
medieval traditions of sorcery and black art.
Danny