!9IQChSjwSHXPPWTa:lix.systems

Lix

965 Members
Lix user channel. Feel free to discuss on-topic issues here and give each other help. For matrix.to links to the rest of the Lix channels, see: https://wiki.lix.systems/books/lix-organisation/page/matrix-rooms262 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
9 Jul 2025
@lotte:chir.rsCharlotte 🦝 (it/its)
In reply to @aloisw:julia0815.de
The memory limit is only checked after each evaluation, so it can definitely happen.
ah
11:14:10
@lotte:chir.rsCharlotte 🦝 (it/its)so reducing it to 1GiB or less might work better?11:14:37
@aloisw:julia0815.dealoiswIt's not going to help much if the numbers from your post are accurate. You need to reduce the number of workers or the memory usage per evaluation.15:17:30
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius Grimmauld (any/all) i pulled hyperfine and am currently running the benchmark you said 16:48:13
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusand i don't think i'm reproducing your results at all16:48:21
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius
nixpkgs on  master 
❯ hyperfine --warmup 2 "./2_91/bin/nix-eval-jobs --workers 6 /home/raito/dev/github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs --system x86_64-linux" 
Benchmark 1: ./2_91/bin/nix-eval-jobs --workers 6 /home/raito/dev/github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs --system x86_64-linux
  Time (mean ± σ):     110.343 s ±  3.017 s    [User: 354.990 s, System: 111.729 s]
  Range (min … max):   103.929 s … 114.064 s    10 runs
 

nixpkgs on  master took 25m43s 
❯ hyperfine --warmup 2 "./2_92/bin/nix-eval-jobs --workers 6 /home/raito/dev/github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs --system x86_64-linux"
Benchmark 1: ./2_92/bin/nix-eval-jobs --workers 6 /home/raito/dev/github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs --system x86_64-linux
  Time (mean ± σ):     109.001 s ±  3.871 s    [User: 348.020 s, System: 109.610 s]
  Range (min … max):   103.484 s … 117.563 s    10 runs
17:00:48
@k900:0upti.meK900What the fuck hardware are you running this on holy shit17:01:45
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusthe same as you lol17:01:53
@k900:0upti.meK9002 minute nej on all of nixpkgs???17:01:54
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusthis is my Ryzen17:01:56
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius on all of nixpkgs on x86_64-linux 17:02:04
@k900:0upti.meK900Well yes17:02:09
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusi always had 2 minutes nej all the time17:02:10
@k900:0upti.meK900But like17:02:11
@k900:0upti.meK900Huh17:02:13
@k900:0upti.meK900Really?17:02:16
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius(on the EPYC 7763, it goes even faster)17:02:19
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusyep!17:02:20
@k900:0upti.meK900OK so either my closure thing is dog slow17:02:29
@k900:0upti.meK900Or17:02:30
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusnej is absurdly fast on Zen ≥ 3 platforms with a lot of cores17:02:31
@k900:0upti.meK900WAIT.17:02:31
@k900:0upti.meK900 @Grimmauld (any/all) are you testing on the closure thing 17:02:40
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusi mean if your entrypoint is something different than nixpkgs, then yes :D17:02:52
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusi'm not evaluating the same thing17:02:55
@k900:0upti.meK900No not that17:03:01
@k900:0upti.meK900The closure thing parses nej output17:03:08
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusye17:03:16
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariushe's indeed testing the rust software called closure-thingy17:03:26
@k900:0upti.meK900That's my thing17:03:34

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10