[deleted]
Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
31–40 of 187 posts
Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#32Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#33Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> i actually put HDDs on some workstations as SSD just die after 2-3 years of active build on them That sounds very low for modern SSDs, even consumer-grade. Have you tried different vendors?
If spending hours a day at 100% utility, SSDs will rarely last 5 years.
see: https://www.anandtech.com/show/6459/samsung-ssd-840-testing-...
Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
> i actually put HDDs on some workstations as SSD just die after 2-3 years of active build on them That sounds very low for modern SSDs, even consumer-grade. Have you tried different vendors?
If spending hours a day at 100% utility, SSDs will rarely last 5 years.
Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make forces you to choose between being able to do full parallel builds or using recursive make, you can’t do both.
I might be misunderstanding something, but the common gnumake does no such thing. https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Job-Slots...
This is fairly common in larger projects, so you end up having to do some hackery to manually sequence make invocations if you want to use recursive make (which is pretty awful).
Honestly, for large projects, Make is an insane choice, notwithstanding the fact that people who are sufficiently savvy at Make can sometimes make it work. (If your tools are bad, you can make up for it with extra staff time and expertise.)
Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#37Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
i (and some teamates) actually put HDDs on some workstations as SSD just die after 2-3 years of active build on them and with modern HDDs you have practically unlimited storage while you can have only limited number of 400G builds on SSD (the org has psychological barriers to having more than 1-2Tb SSD in a machine) and the SSD start to have perf issues when at 70-80% capacity . With HDD the build time didn't change…
Those are pretty beefy workstations, does every developer have one or are these really build servers? As I noted you could always throw money at this and end up somewhere reasonable, but it introduces workflow considerations for your devs.
Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
What kind of workload will do that?
a build server recompiling multiple branches over and over in response to changes.
Every build gets fully tested at maximum TRACE logging, so that anyone who looks at the build / test later can search the logs for the bug.
8TBs of storage is a $200 hard drive. Fill it up, save everything. Buy 5 hard drives, copy data across them redundantly with ZFS and stuff.
1TBs of SSD storage is $100 (for 4GBps) to $200 (for 7GBps). Copy data from the hard drive array on the build server to the local workstation as you try to debug what went wrong in some unit test.
Re: Threadripper 3990X: The Quest To Compile 1B Lines Of C++ On 64 Cores
#40make -j>3 just locks the process and fails.