Re: FYI: Over 2 hours spent (so far) in /usr/local/share/poudriere/ executing bzgrep commands for www/chromium failure

From: Mark Millard via freebsd-toolchain <>
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2021 00:39:17 UTC
On 2021-Aug-6, at 14:24, <> wrote:
>> On 08/04/2021 4:43 PM Mark Millard via freebsd-toolchain <> wrote:
>> it has spent over 2 hours (so far) doing:
>> /usr/local/share/poudriere/ activity ( /usr/bin/bzgrep 's ) of/for:
> fwiw is not part of the toolchain per se.  It is a script that is part
> of poudriere.

poudriere clearly is not part of the buildworld buildkernel

Since poudriere is used as infrastructure for building
ports into packages, including use on one or more
aarch64 systems for such, I took a guess that toolchain
was more appropriate than ports for what list to use.
Sorry if I guessed wrong.

> I have maintained it in various incarnations over the years.

> One of the things that I have tried to do is minimize the time the script takes in a run
> over the errorlogs for an entire build.  These generally complete in around a minute or so.

Until attempting www/chromium builds, I'd never noticed
the time frame but in this case I was monitoring with top,
as well as waiting for pouriere's next output after it
reported having saved the wrkdir.

In the end it was about 2 hr 50 min. Part of this is
likely just the size of a log file from a www/chromium
build attempt that gets near the end.

The actual log file is not compressed and can be looked at
with just less or more or the like. Such is how I normally
take a preliminary look at build failures.

> You will need to figure out how big your logfile is, and compare it to the size of a
> successful logfile, to figure out what is going on.

Unfortunately the system involved is down/not-accessible
for about a day or two. So I'll not be able to check
details for a while.

The www/chromium build is huge and my original report
lists the size of the log file in the "ls -LTld" output:
153683812 . So, between 146 MiByte and 147 MiByte.

A successful build's log file would be larger. The build
only made it into the 94% range for what ninja reports
about steps executed. (Unfortunately, rebuilds use
different alternative orderings that satisfy the partial
ordering criteria. So build to build varies. I've also
seen 77% for the same failure on the same file.)

For reference: the (root) file system is on an Optane
480 GiByte in the PCIe 3 slot and is a ZFS file system.
The system has 64 GiByte of RAM. The swap partitioning
is on the same media.

For reference:
Using USE_TMPFS="yes" lead to the tmpfs for the wrkdir
involved being over 99000 MiByte (so somewhat under
100 GiByte). The system configuration was sufficient to
not run out of swap/paging space, 64 GiByte of RAM + 120
GiByte of swap-space. I've since adjusted to just have
USE_TMPFS="data" now that I know of an example of such a
huge wrkdir. (lang/rust ends up with a small wrkdir
peak size, by comparison to www/chromium anyway.)

Until I again get access to the system, that is about
all I can report.

Mark Millard
marklmi at
( went
away in early 2018-Mar)