From Newsgroup: muc.lists.freebsd.ports

On 5/30/26 3:14 PM, void@f-m.fm wrote:

On Sat, May 30, 2026 at 05:26:37PM +0200, Bugs Beastie wrote:

Just finished one build:
[4D:08:25:51] [01] [21:03:31] Finished-a-a devel/electron39 |
electron39-39.8.10_1: Success
21 hours for electron39, this is on 4x3.3GHz core i5!
[electron41 failed in a strange way in fetch/checksum phase, no data
for it now]

[07:51:54] [01] [06:04:22] Finished-a-a devel/electron41 | electron41-41.7.1: Success

This is a from-scratch build. In other words the poudriere builder was cleaned
with poudriere pkgclean -A -j jailname.

The build was started with 'doas poudriere bulk -j 151amd64 -J16 devel/electron4'

System is

Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 0 @ 2.90GHz / 384GB RAM hw.ncpu=16 SHT=off

ccache4 is in use.

Just want to chime in that I build electron all the time and never see
such crazy long build times.
hw.model: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor
hw.physmem: 137276297216
poudriere.conf:
USE_TMPFS=no
ALLOW_MAKE_JOBS=yes
CCACHE_DIR=/ccache
the result:

-a Cleaning for electron42-42.3.3

build of devel/electron42 | electron42-42.3.3 ended at Sun Jun 14
09:09:20 UTC 2026
build time: 02:17:09
This is a CPU from 6 years ago. It's not even something good like an
EPYC with 192 cores...
Mark
--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-admin@muc.de
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: muc.lists.freebsd.ports

--1d5d0fb1-f324-462b-8aec-c089c3362c4b-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

June 24, 2026 at 10:03 PM, "Mark Millard" <marklmi@yahoo.com mailto:markl= mi@yahoo.com?to=3D%22Mark%20Millard%22%20%3Cmarklmi%40yahoo.com%3E > =
wrote:

=20
Do you allow a bunch of other port package builds to potentially be
running in parallel?
=20

Yes, it will often be competing with multiple llvm, gcc, and the rust =
port. But it has never taken anywhere near as long as it does on the =
build cluster.

Is it because I have 250GB of ccache on an NVME? I wouldn't expect it to =
have such a significant impact but considering the size of the codebase = perhaps it does.

Mark

--1d5d0fb1-f324-462b-8aec-c089c3362c4b-1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"t= ext/html; charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body><div><br>June 24, 2026 at 10:03 =
PM, "Mark Millard" &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:marklmi@yahoo.com?to=3D%22Mark%2= 0Millard%22%20%3Cmarklmi%40yahoo.com%3E" target=3D"_blank" tabindex=3D"-1= ">marklmi@yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:</div><blockquote>Do you allow a bunch =
of other port package builds to potentially be<br>running in parallel?<br= ></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, it will often be competing with = multiple llvm, gcc, and the rust port. But it has never taken anywhere =
near as long as it does on the build cluster.</div><div><br></div><div>Is=
it because I have 250GB of ccache on an NVME? I wouldn't expect it to =
have such a significant impact but considering the size of the codebase = perhaps it does.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>M= ark</div></body></html>

--1d5d0fb1-f324-462b-8aec-c089c3362c4b-1--


--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-admin@muc.de
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: muc.lists.freebsd.ports

On 6/29/26 12:59, Mark Felder wrote:

June 24, 2026 at 10:03 PM, "Mark Millard" <marklmi@yahoo.com <mailto:marklmi@yahoo.com? to=%22Mark%20Millard%22%20%3Cmarklmi%40yahoo.com%3E>> wrote:

Do you allow a bunch of other port package builds to potentially be
running in parallel?

Yes, it will often be competing with multiple llvm, gcc, and the rust
port. But it has never taken anywhere near as long as it does on the
build cluster.

ALLOW_MAKE_JOBS in use? What sort of figure for the likes of MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT (or related such) per builder? How many builders
allowed at once? How much RAM? SWAP? (so RAM+SWAP) Style of tmpfs use?

For the most part the official build machines use 3 for
MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_* type figures as I remember. The maximum builders
count is computed from the RAM and hardware threads available, as I
remember. Using all the hardware threads on some machines would have not
much RAM per hardware thread (mean).

Of the 35000+ port-packages, what size subset do you build (even if only
rarely as large as the figure you give, if you do)?

[The builder machines span a wide range of ages and configurations.]

Is it because I have 250GB of ccache on an NVME? I wouldn't expect it to
have such a significant impact but considering the size of the codebase perhaps it does.

Could be, depending on how much can be determined to not need
rebuilding. Having an effective NVME ccache spanning a build of 35000+
port packages might be problematical. I'm not aware of the build servers
using such.
--
===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com


--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-admin@muc.de
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: muc.lists.freebsd.ports

Mark Felder <feld@freebsd.org> writes:

Yes, it will often be competing with multiple llvm, gcc, and the rust
port. But it has never taken anywhere near as long as it does on the
build cluster.

Poudriere's scheduling is lousy (though it's mostly not its own fault).
You basically have a choice between occasional gridlock and chronic underutilization, and it's actually easier to gridlock a beefier builder
than a skinnier one. I desperately want to do something about it, but
it's more work than I can take on in my spare time, so it's not going to
happen any time soon unless someone is willing to sponsor it.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Sm|+rgrav - des@FreeBSD.org
--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-admin@muc.de
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2