[J3] [EXTERNAL] [BULK] Re: Question to compiler developers about compilation speed

[Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101)]

I had wondered if arranging the compiler itself to be on SSD could make the difference.   This is relatively easy to try with some compilers (NAG in particular), but not so much with Intel which is our work horse.



From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> on behalf of Van Snyder via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Date: Tuesday, October 29, 2024 at 3:50 PM
To: Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Cc: Van Snyder <van.snyder at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [BULK] Re: [J3] Question to compiler developers about compilation speed
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of NASA.  Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments.  Use the "Report Message" button to report suspicious messages to the NASA SOC.


On Tue, 2024-10-29 at 15:32 +0000, Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) via J3 wrote:
But I was quite surprised to find the actualbuild time did not significantly improve.   First, we have found that each new submodules often takes a similar amount of time to compile as the original module.   Second, we also found that the depopulated module was often nearly as expensive to compile as the original.

I suspect it's dominated by I/O to read the compilers' representations of accessible module entities. It would be difficult (or impossible) for users such as Tom to profile the compilers to verify this conjecture.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20241030/1a5000f2/attachment.htm>