Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 12:00 PM <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> > to answer your original question: I think the \sourcefileline >> statements can >> > differ between snippets written from different lp-book instances, and >> this can >> > trigger a consistency check failure. >> >> So wouldn't it appear that the way to exploit parallelism with >> lilypond-book, short of writing its own jobserver, is to use CPU_COUNT >> like we did before? > > I think we should do both: the lilypond runs in lp-book should be > protected by some sort of lock, and we should use both CPU_COUNT=M and > -jN. > > then worst case, you have M lilypond processes and N-1 other jobs. > > BTW, you run at -j8 with only 4 CPUs, right? If you have an SSD > drive, this is probably doesn't bring benefits, as there is no I/O > delay any more that you can paper over with CPU bound tasks.
I run with -j9, using 1 CPU for I/O latency and 4 CPUs for hyperthreading. I wish there were no I/O delay any more, that would be nice. -- David Kastrup
