[distcc] Re: distcc Digest, Vol 1, Issue 159

Scott Lystig Fritchie nospam at snookles.com
Thu Jan 30 18:13:07 GMT 2003

>>>>> "mp" == Martin Pool <mbp at samba.org> wrote:

>> Could we perhaps change it to only do so after exhausting all
>> possibilities listed in DISTCC_HOSTS?  Not all of the machines in
>> my cluster are listed all the time, and it sucks to have to tweak
>> DISTCC_HOSTS every time one of them is powered on or off or risk
>> overloading localhost.

mp> The problem is that it might waste a lot of time trying to connect
mp> to various unusable hosts.

mp> I think a better solution might be to have some kind of backoff
mp> mechanism for machines that are not reachable.

A suitably-intelligent proxy between the box running distcc and the
DISTCC_HOSTS can take care of that problem.

Out of curiosity ... has anyone actually tried using the
distcc-friendly load-balancing TCP proxy I mentioned last month?  If
so, please contact me directly with your experience, positive or
negative.  Thanks!


More information about the distcc mailing list