On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 11:54, Jean-Eric Cuendet wrote: > Thanks, but the patch is corrupted at the URL. > Could you resend it to me? > Thanks.
Here it is, decoded: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.distcc/416 > This patch is a solution to send more than one job at each CPU. But the solution >should go beyond that. > I think that the dispatch should be completely dynamic. I see our dev environment >being composed of dev machines for developpers and compile farms to speedup the >compilation. These machines should be loaded with compilation from all the developers >at the same time, when they run compilation. > But then, the spawned jobs should be sent depending on the current load of each >compilation server. > This could be achieved if the server send an average of its load before/after each >compilation sent. > How hard would it be to modify the distcc code so the server send the client the >laodavg? That would be Martin's call, but I think it falls under the "premature optimization is the root of all evil" category, as described in the FAQ: http://distcc.samba.org/faq.html#central-controller Also, it probably not even an optimization, as distcc has near linear scalability already: if a host is heavily loaded (or just slow) it'll take longer to finish the job, and therefore it'll get fewer jobs. I'd rather compile on a 50% loaded Athlon XP 2000+ than a 1% loaded Pentium 200MHz. -- Jonas Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ distcc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/distcc
