[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[gnuastro-devel] [task #14100] Script to configure and build in tmpfs (R
[gnuastro-devel] [task #14100] Script to configure and build in tmpfs (RAM)
Thu, 28 Jul 2016 22:38:06 +0000 (UTC)
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:47.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/47.0
Follow-up Comment #4, task #14100 (project gnuastro):
Great test, thank you! I also tried it out. But I didn't do the bootstrapping
because this script is only concerned with configure and make. Both were run
after a 'make distclean'.
$ time (./configure &&make -j8)
$ time (./parallel-build-in-tmpfs)
For me it was just slightly (<2 sec) faster! I then thought it might be
because of the source file reading speed bottle-neck. Since the source wasn't
in the RAM. So I unpacked a 'make dist' tarball in the /dev/shm and ran
configure and make there. The result wasn't any different (within errors) than
the './parallel-build-in-tmpfs' result above:
I then checked the memory usage before and after the processes involving
/dev/shm (to make sure that tmpfs was actually in the RAM, not SWAP) and I saw
that indeed the files are in the RAM. So I am also confused!
The main thing I was concerned about when coming up with this script was the
burden of a large number of read/writes on the SSD drive. I hadn't actually
objectively tested the running time like the test above. I guess this shows
how important prejudice is ;-)!
I am curious if you are also using an SSD or HDD? Since your running time is
so similar to mine, I guess you are also using an SSD, right? Probably on a
HDD the difference might be more. I can't test on a HDD now.
At least I feel it is good that the writings of small files are done in the
RAM not on the SSD. But I am still confused how the running time difference is
Reply to this item at:
Message sent via/by Savannah