On 11 Sep 2002, Tim Small <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mmm, we've chosen to use LVS for this, as I've previously said, and I > think this is probably a good generic way to solve this sort of > problem
I really do wonder if the load will fluctuate too fast for LVS to do well. But the proof is in the pudding -- let's get some numbers on going over LVS versus the built-in spreader across all the machines. It is nice that LVS can be done transparently to the application. -- Martin _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
