X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C82870.7BBE270C@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:48:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: please Review
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:48:15 -0800
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0699298A@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: please Review
Thread-Index: Acgn+sHoaRy3b0taRLmVf2P2xB+F4wAc1C9gAACKRuA=
References: <20071115170855.03e509ae@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E069927BE@onstor-exch02.onstor.net> <20071115184532.1851f33c@ripper.onstor.net> 
From: "Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
To: "Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>,
	"Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>

>>On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:16:51 -0800 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
>><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Makefile: No, we want to use all the processors and then some to
>>> compensate for the I/O latencies. If you want better response times
>>> while running the compilation you can always run make with "nice".
>>
>>I know all about I/O latencies.  Hey, I don't do this for myself, I do
>>it for people sharing machines like compile2 and whatnot.  At least
>>there will be one "processor-lite" *slightly* available for bash
>>response. Since each compile uses up 2-3 processes, it's going to
>>hammer on all the processors anyway.
>>
>>But fine, have it your way.  I remove the "-1" as we speak.
>Well I don't really care since I don't use this Makefile, so yeah
whatever.
>What really should be done is don't put any -j settings in the makefile
and
>let everybody use their own -j value on the command line.
[MK]=20
... if somebody uses distributed compilation for example, using the
local number of processors to determine the -j value is particular bad
idea.
