> > Where is that flag? Randomized selection sounds good. What about > using an exponential distribution, which prefers slots towards the > start of the list? Would be easy to implement. >
See the disttc(1) of distcc 3.0 or http://distcc.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/web/man/distcc_1.html this is one of the patches we've used at Google for some time. The major omission in the current code, in my opinion, is that > randomization does not take into account the specified host slots. > OK, that would be something to change then. > > It would be fine if one could list a host multiple times (which would > emulate the behavior I was looking for). This is not possible currently. > > The easiest way for a better selection implementation would be to > first expand the host/slotcount list to a list of host/slotnumber > pairs and then select > > a) linearly from the front > b) with exponential random distribution > c) with uniform random distribution > d) ... what ever else may seem appropriate > > I think that simply interpreting the slotnumber as a weight for a uniform distribution is all what's needed in practice. To really improve scheduling for smaller installations there's is probably other more important low-hanging fruit such as the enjoyed-host logic that disables the selection of a host for a couple of minutes -- whatever the reason for compilation failure is. /Nils
__ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
