feature request: record build space used

[Joe Marcus Clarke]

Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:03:05 -0400
> Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
>> Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:18:16 -0400
>>> Wesley Shields <wxs at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:11:48PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 13:59 +0300, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
>>>>>> Yeh, an other one ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be very useful to me to have, for each port, stored in
>>>>>> the database the total size of the space it occupies, together
>>>>>> with base OS and dependencies, at build time. This value should
>>>>>> be updated, if bigger that current values, even if the build
>>>>>> fails.
>>>>> How would one know the size before the port builds?  Dependencies
>>>>> are one thing, but we have no concept of size (even distfile size)
>>>>> before buildscript is called.
>>>> You can get a rough idea of it based upon the previous build?  Take
>>>> the previous build and add on N% of space for growth?
>>> Exactly. While it might fail for a few ports that suddenly grow, it
>>> will work for 99%.
>>>
>>> From my educated guess:
>>> - for at least 50% of the ports tindy is spending more time untaring
>>> the jail that doing anything else. 
>>> - for 95% of the ports 2GB of RAM-based build space is more that
>>> enough;
>>>
>>> What I'd like is to be able to have everything in RAM for those 95%
>>> without maintaining an exceptions list by hand. For the current
>>> hardware QA Tindy is running on I should get at least 35% "speed"
>>> improvement for a full run. (The jail tarball is cached by the fs in
>>> memory for me).
>> So what would the size take into account?
> 
> If I use mdmfs or not. I don't have 8GB for OOo or some games.

No, I mean what would count towards a port's total size (e.g. 
dependencies, wrkdir, etc.)?

Joe

> 
> 


-- 
Joe Marcus Clarke
FreeBSD GNOME Team	::	gnome at FreeBSD.org
FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome