On 09/04/2012 08:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> Frankly, I have had enough failures of parallel make that I think doing
>> this would generate a significant number of non-repeatable failures (I
>> had one just the other day that took three invocations of make to get
>> right). So I'm not sure doing this would advance us much, although I'm
>> open to persuasion.
> Really? I routinely use -j4 for building, and it's been a long time
> since I've seen failures. I can believe that for instance "make check"
> in contrib would have a problem running in parallel, but the build
> process per se seems reliable enough from here.
>
>
Both cases were vpath builds, which is what I usually use, if that's a
useful data point.
Maybe I run on lower level hardware than you do. I saw this again this
afternoon after I posted the above. In both cases this was the machine
that runs the buildfarm's crake. I'll try to get a handle on it.
cheers
andrew