Heya Markus,
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 02:37:02AM +0200, Markus Mohrhard wrote:
> The results for the initial build without building or executing the tests:
>
> real 70m17.990s
> user 436m43.860s
> sys 28m3.680s
>
> After that the results of a time make, therefore forcing the build of
> everything test related and executing the tests:
>
> real 11m30.192s
> user 58m43.384s
> sys 1m36.876s
Did you by chance have an opportunity to also ran "make" from scratch on that
machine? I assume/hope it wont take the 70 min + 11 min = 82 min. a straight
addition would make one assume, because make will use idle job slots during a
full build.
IOW, these number suggest a 82min/70min = 17% overhead in real and a (436 +
58)min/436min = 13% overhead in CPU time -- but I assume the real overhead in a
build from scratch is smaller than both of that in the real world.
The most critical time I see from in all this is not anything build from
scratch anyway, but the for a simple
touch-one-cxx-recompile-relink-and-then-run-all-the-tests scenarios. So the:
> real 6m37.479s
> user 45m4.740s
as an _absolute_ is the key there, I guess.
Best,
Bjoern
P.S.: I would have assumed compiling/linking the tests to take much more time
than running the tests. But it seems with 45min/58min=77% -- most of the time
is indeed spend on running tests, not building them.
P.S.: For reference, the output of "time make build-nocheck" would be helpful
too (aka a noop incremental build time overhead in make/dep parsing etc.)
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
