[distcc] distcc over slow net links

Martin Pool mbp at sourcefrog.net
Mon Aug 25 12:48:21 GMT 2003

On Mon 2003-08-25, Dag Wieers wrote:

> Well, at the end of compiling the set of objects (either the end of
> that parallelization or when -j5 was given, after the 5th job).

What set of objects?  Make does not tell distcc the list of targets that
will be built or the -j level.  

> > One can imagine a naive algorithm wasting a lot of time.
> > 
> > To turn the question around: why don't we just schedule the job on
> > the nearby machine in the first place?
> Because it may make configuring complex (define what machine is nearby
> and what not) and a configuration may be static while the environment
> is changing a lot (read: I could be moving from offices).

But re-queueing the job on a nearby machine seems to require this same
knowledge too.

> If we could test the latency of the network and the 'power' of each
> system before compiling and have a some clever logic for deciding
> which systems to use in what order, it would be even better. Because
> there's no additional configuring involved and it would work with
> dynamic set-ups.

I think I'd like it to gain information about the speed of machines as
it goes along.  Perhaps that would allow it to sort the machines into a
different order, or perhaps have stronger preferences between machines
than it does at the moment.


More information about the distcc mailing list