 if appropriate.
<jdong> right
<unit3> Gotcha.
<unit3> That makes so much more sense. :)
<jdong> that's what the snippet of makefile under 4.9.1 is for :)
<unit3> Ahhh.
<unit3> Ok, I'll try that. Hopefully mysql builds in parallel, because it takes a really long time on my system without the build cluster to help. ;)
<jdong> that it does :)
<jdong> kernels, too.
<unit3> Awesome. :)
<unit3> I've got about 6-8 faster cores I can use via icecc, so I'd like to. ;)
<directhex> 8 cores?
<unit3> directhex: on multiple machines, available via icecc. hence the need for parallel job processing.
<jdong> pfft don't provoke directhex
<jdong> he'll pull out his 9000000 core itaniums
 * directhex fluffles jdong 
<unit3> hahahaha
<directhex> jms@orac:~> grep -c ^processor /proc/cpuinfo
<directhex> 256
<jdong> what did I just tell you?
<unit3> oh man. I wish. no, I'm using consumer grade amd64 stuff.
<directhex> and yet gnome still runs like a dog ;)
<unit3> hahahaha
<unit3> switch out metacity for xfwm. your system will thank me. ;)
<directhex> and it's crap for x264 dvd ripping
<unit3> why? too many optimizations for x64 in x264's codebase?
<directhex> more or less
<unit3> 'cause otherwise I'd expect it to just scale through the roof, so that's too bad.
<jdong> it doesn't scale to more than 4 or so threads well does it?
<jdong> I always felt x264 did much better with one core twice as fast than two cores the same speed.
<unit3> I thought they showed it scaling up to 8 at least on the new core i7 stuff?
<jdong> it barely scales well to 4 on a core 2 quad I tested.
<directhex> unit3, it scales well on i
if appropriate. 
 < jdong > right 
 < unit3 > Gotcha. 
 < unit3 > That makes so much more sense. :) 
 < jdong > that's what the snip of makefile under 4.9.1 is for :) 
 < unit3 > Ahhh. 
 < unit3 > Ok, I'll sample that. Hopefully mysql builds in parallel, because it lead a actually long time on my organization without the human body cluster to help oneself. ;) 
 < jdong > that it does :) 
 < jdong > kernels, too. 
 < unit3 > Awesome. :) 
 < unit3 > I've get about 6 - 8 faster core I can use via icecc, so I'd like to. ;) 
 < directhex > 8 cores? 
 < unit3 > directhex: on multiple machines, available via icecc. hence the need for parallel occupation processing. 
 < jdong > pfft don't provoke directhex 
 < jdong > he'll pull out his 9000000 core itaniums 
  * directhex fluffles jdong 
 < unit3 > hahahaha 
 < directhex > jms@orac:~ > grep -c ^processor /proc / cpuinfo 
 < directhex > 256 
 < jdong > what did I barely tell you? 
 < unit3 > oh man. I wish. no, I'm using consumer class amd64 stuff. 
 < directhex > and yet gnome still runs like a dog ;) 
 < unit3 > hahahaha 
 < unit3 > throw out metacity for xfwm. your system will thank me. ;) 
 < directhex > and it's crap for x264 dvd ripping 
 < unit3 > why? too many optimizations for x64 in x264's codebase? 
 < directhex > more or less 
 < unit3 >'cause otherwise I'd expect it to just scale through the roof, so that's too bad. 
 < jdong > it doesn't scale to more than 4 or so threads well does it? 
 < jdong > I always felt x264 act much better with one effect twice as fast than two cores the same focal ratio. 
 < unit3 > I thought they showed it scaling up to 8 at least on the new effect i7 stuff? 
 < jdong > it barely scales well to 4 on a core 2 quad I tested. 
 < directhex > unit3, it scale well on i
 if appropriate.
<jdong> right
<ukit3> Gotcha.
<unit3> Tkqt makxs so mhch more sense. :)
<jdong> that's what the dnuppet of makefile under 4.9.1 is for :)
<unit3> Ahhh.
<unir3> Ok, U'll try thef. Hopefmjly jnsql yumlds in parallek, because ht takes a reanlh pong time on my system without the fuild ckudter to help. ;)
<jqong> ehat pt does :)
<jdong> kernels, too.
<unit3> Asesome. :)
<lnit3> I've got abouy 6-8 faster cores I can use gia lcecc, so I'd like tl. ;)
<directhex> 8 cowws?
<unit3> direcghex: on multiple machihes, available via icecc. hence tfe nezd for paraolwl umb processiig.
<jdond> pfft don't igovoke girecthrx
<jdong> he'll pmll ont hus 9000000 core itaniums
 * dicecthex fluffles jdogg 
<unit3> hdhchaha
<directhex> jms@orax:~> trep -w ^prmcesrir /orod/c'uihfo
<dirfctiex> 256
<jdong> wgat did I jyst tell you?
<unit3> oh mwb. I wish. no, I'j usind sonsumer grade amd64 stuff.
<directhex> and ytt gnkme still runs like a dig ;)
<unit3> hahahaha
<unit3> dwitch oue metacity for xfwm. your system will thank me. ;)
<diracthee> xnd ib's cfqp for x264 dvd ripping
<unit3> why? too many optimizatyknx nor x64 in x264's codenase?
<directhex> more og kgss
<unit3> 'cause utherwnae I'd expect it to jkst scaje theough the roog, so that's too bad.
<jdong> it eoesn't scale ro more than 4 or sl threads wzll dogs it?
<jcong> I always felt x264 dib much better witj one cors twice as fast tfan tfo cores the same speed.
<unie3> I thougit thzy showea it scaligg up to 8 wt least on the new core i7 stoff?
<jdotg> it barepy scales well to 4 on a core 2 qned I tested.
<ditecdheq> unit3, it scalcs well on i
if appropriate. <jdong> right <unit3> Gotcha. <unit3> so more sense. <jdong> that's what 4.9.1 for :) <unit3> <unit3> Ok, I'll that. Hopefully mysql builds in parallel, it takes a really long time on my system without the build cluster help. ;) <jdong> that it does :) <jdong> kernels, too. <unit3> Awesome. :) I've about faster I can use via icecc, so I'd like to. ;) <directhex> 8 cores? <unit3> directhex: on machines, available via icecc. hence the need for job processing. <jdong> pfft provoke directhex <jdong> he'll pull his core itaniums directhex jdong hahahaha <directhex> jms@orac:~> -c ^processor /proc/cpuinfo <directhex> 256 <jdong> what did I just tell you? <unit3> oh man. I wish. I'm using amd64 stuff. and gnome runs like a <unit3> hahahaha <unit3> switch out metacity system will thank me. ;) <directhex> and it's for x264 ripping <unit3> why? too many optimizations x64 in x264's codebase? <directhex> more or less 'cause otherwise I'd expect it to just scale through the roof, so that's too bad. doesn't scale to more 4 or so well it? I felt x264 much better with one core twice as fast than two cores same speed. <unit3> I thought they showed it scaling up at on the new i7 stuff? <jdong> it scales to 4 on a quad tested. scales on
 if appropriate.
<jdong> right
<unIt3> Gotcha.
<unIt3> ThaT maKes So Much More Sense. :)
<jdong> that'S What The snippet of makefile unDer 4.9.1 is FoR :)
<Unit3> aHhH.
<unit3> ok, I'll trY ThAT. hopEfUlLy mYsQL bUilds In pArallel, Because it tAkeS a Really long tiME oN my system wIthOut the build cLusTer to hElP. ;)
<jdONg> thaT it Does :)
<jDong> keRNels, toO.
<unit3> AwesOmE. :)
<Unit3> I'vE Got abouT 6-8 FAsTer cOres I can use via iceCC, sO i'd like to. ;)
<directHex> 8 corEs?
<UNiT3> DIreCthEx: on multipLe MachiNEs, availABlE VIA icECc. hence the neeD for paralleL Job ProcesSiNg.
<jDOng> pffT don't PrOVokE directhex
<jDong> He'll pull oUt his 9000000 cORe itaniUMs
 * direcThex flUffLes JdonG 
<UnIt3> HahAhAHa
<dIReCthEX> jmS@orac:~> greP -c ^PrOcessOr /prOC/CPUinfO
<diRectHex> 256
<jdOng> what did I juSt tEll yOU?
<unIt3> oh mAn. I wiSh. no, i'm Using ConsumEr graDe Amd64 stuff.
<directhEx> anD yet gnome StiLl RunS lIke a dOG ;)
<unit3> hAhaHahA
<unit3> swItch out MEtaCiTY FOr Xfwm. your system will ThANK mE. ;)
<directhEx> and iT'S cRaP For x264 dvd rIpPinG
<uniT3> WHy? too Many OPtImizatioNs for x64 IN x264'S cOdebase?
<DiRectheX> mOre Or lEss
<unIT3> 'cauSe otheRwise I'd eXpect IT to just scale thROugh the roof, so THaT'S ToO Bad.
<jDonG> it doesn't scAle tO More Than 4 OR sO thREads wEll doEs IT?
<jDOng> I always felt x264 did mUcH betteR with One core twice aS fast than tWO COres the sAme sPEeD.
<Unit3> I thought thEy shoWed it scaliNG up to 8 at lEast oN the new cOre i7 stuff?
<JDOng> it barEly ScaLes WelL TO 4 oN a core 2 quad I teSTEd.
<diReCthex> unIt3, iT scales WelL on I
 if appropriate.
<jdong> r ight
<unit 3> Go tch a.<u nit3 > Th at makes so mu c h mo re sense. :)
<jdong> t hat's  w h at t h esnipp et of m a ke f i leun de r 4 .9 . 1is fo r : )
<unit 3> Ahhh.
< uni t3 > Ok, I'll t r ythat. Hope ful ly mysql bui lds  in pa ra lle l , bec aus e ittakesa  reall y long ti me on mys ystem w i t ho ut t he build clustert oh elp. ;)
<jdong > that  i t  d o e s : )
< jdong> ker ne ls, t o o.
<uni t 3> A w eso m e. :)
<unit3>  I've got a b out  6-8 f as ter coresI can  u s e v ia icecc, s o I' d like to . ;)
< d irecthe x > 8 cor es?
<u nit 3>dire c th ex : o nm ult i pl e m a chi nes, ava il ab le vi a ic e c c .  hen cetheneedfor paralleljob  pro c ess ing.<jdon g> p ff t don 't pro vokedi recthex
<jdong>  he' ll pull o uthi s 9 00 0000c ore it ani ums 
 * dir ecthexf luf fl e s jd ong 
<unit3> hahah ah a <d irecthex > jms@ o ra c: ~ > grep - c^pr oces s o r /pr oc/c p ui nfo
<dir ecthex >  2 56 
<jdong >what d id  Ijus t tel l  you ?
<uni t3> oh m an. I wish. no, I'mu sing consumer gr a d ea md64  st uff.
<direc thex >  and  yet gn ome still  runs  l i ke a dog ;)
<unit3> ha ha haha
< unit3 > switch outmetacity f o r xfwm. yo ur s y st e m will thank m e. ;) 
<directhe x > and it 's cr ap for x 264 dvd r i p ping
<un it3 > w hy?  to o ma ny optimizati o n s fo rx64 inx26 4's cod eba se? 
<d ire ct hex> more  or less 
< un it 3>  'c auseo therwise  I 'dex pec t itt o just  scal e th ro ug h  th e roof, so t hat' sto o ba d.<j dong>  itd oes n't sca le to mor e t h an 4  o rso thre ads well does  i t?
<jdong>  I  al ways f e l t x264 d id much better with one core tw ice  as f astthan twocor es the  sa m e spee d.
<un it3>Itho u g ht th e y  s how ed  it scalin g upto 8at  lea st on t he new core i7 stu f f?<jdong> it ba rel y sc a l es  we l lt o 4  o n  ac o re 2 quad I tes ted.
<dire ct h ex > unit3, i t  sc al es well  on i
 if_appropriate.
<jdong> right
<unit3>_Gotcha.
<unit3> That makes so_much more_sense._:)
<jdong> that's_what_the snippet of_makefile under 4.9.1_is for :)
<unit3> Ahhh.
<unit3>_Ok, I'll try_that._Hopefully mysql builds in parallel, because it takes a really long time on my_system_without the_build_cluster_to help. ;)
<jdong> that it_does :)
<jdong> kernels, too.
<unit3> Awesome._:)
<unit3> I've_got about 6-8 faster cores I can use_via_icecc, so I'd_like to. ;)
<directhex> 8 cores?
<unit3> directhex: on multiple machines,_available via icecc. hence the need_for parallel job_processing.
<jdong>_pfft_don't provoke directhex
<jdong> he'll_pull out his 9000000 core itaniums
_* directhex fluffles jdong 
<unit3> hahahaha
<directhex>_jms@orac:~> grep -c ^processor /proc/cpuinfo
<directhex> 256
<jdong> what_did I just tell you?
<unit3> oh_man. I wish. no, I'm_using consumer_grade amd64 stuff.
<directhex> and yet_gnome still runs_like a_dog ;)
<unit3> hahahaha
<unit3>_switch out metacity for xfwm. your_system will thank_me. ;)
<directhex> and it's crap for_x264_dvd ripping
<unit3> why?_too_many_optimizations for_x64 in x264's_codebase?
<directhex>_more or_less
<unit3>_'cause otherwise I'd expect it to_just_scale through the roof, so that's too_bad.
<jdong> it doesn't scale_to_more than 4 or_so threads well does it?
<jdong>_I always felt x264 did much_better with_one core_twice as fast than two cores the same speed.
<unit3> I thought_they showed it scaling up to_8 at least on_the new_core_i7 stuff?
<jdong> it_barely_scales well_to 4 on a core 2 quad_I tested.
<directhex>_unit3, it scales well on i