3 ms·
Sorry, but I wasn’t making a straw man: the GP I responded to explicitly made the point that they wanted a manycore monster CPU to speed up compiling their enti
by stouset 2y ago
Sorry, but I wasn’t making a straw man: the GP I responded to explicitly made the point that they wanted a manycore monster CPU to speed up compiling their entire OS from scratch.
If all you’re talking about is compiling a few targeted packages for customization or performance reasons, that’s absolutely a reasonable and sensible approach to things.
My question was targeted at the GP’s use case which I wholeheartedly believe is a largely senseless waste of time, effort, CPU cycles, and money.
- bravetraveler 2y ago> Sorry, but I wasn’t making a straw man: the GP I responded to explicitly made the point that they wanted a manycore monster CPU to speed up compiling their entire OS from scratch. This is what they said, emphasis mine: > **most** of my OS Want to try again? It's so arbitrary, I'm good. "49% would be acceptable, 51% - hah!". Nobody dare modify/test 'glibc' or any of the precious libraries. Later, test police :) No hard feelings, I'll admit I don't communicate well and like this stuff a little too much
- stouset 2y agoEvery continuum has arbitrary points, a la “when is a pile a heap”. In this case it becomes insensible somewhere between selecting a few packages which are genuine performance bottlenecks for your workloads or need specific compiler flags for necessary features, and spec’ing out hardware to fit a $5,000+ 192-core CPU so you can feel good about your kernel being able to take advantage of AVX512 for your Linux desktop box.