On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Stefan Ring <stefan...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: >> Killing them was the right decision. Thank you. Like all my cfarm batch >> testing, the processes had setpriority(PRIO_MAX). Perhaps I/O load remained >> high enough to ruin things. > > Unfortunately, process priority is absolutely worthless on machines > with hyperthreading. The other day I witnessed someone using all 64 > virtual cores of gcc110 (the POWER7 machine), and it was godawfully > slow to work with. Sorry about that. But it did allow me to trigger the bug I was looking for.
-- With best regards, Stas. _______________________________________________ Gcc-cfarm-users mailing list Gcc-cfarm-users@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gcc-cfarm-users
