[distcc] load management

Daniel Kegel dank at kegel.com
Wed Apr 28 00:51:27 GMT 2004

Jake McGuire wrote:
>> I don't think blasting all N servers with a UDP packet on
>> each distcc run is a good idea.
> It depends on the size of your preprocessed file.  The one preprocessed 
> file that I looked at from our build was 1.5 megabytes; compared to a 
> thousand TCP packets, plus acks, plus setup and teardown, plus sending 
> back the object file, a few tens of UDP packets is not a big deal.

This is kind of moot if we adopt the local server idea, which
I'm tempted to do.

> Ideally we'd have a proxy server or a hardware loadbalancer, but I don't 
> think we have the budget or the network engineering resources for that 
> to happen.

I think the local server does just about as well as a central proxy
server could.  Maybe better (it could be lower latency and cause
half the network traffic).

>> And all my servers are
>> identical speed, and probably all running just one job,
>> so they're all either busy or not; no connection counts or
>> weights to care about.
> You'd just run your distcc without load management in that case.

No, I still need to not use servers that are busy because of
non-distcc jobs.

- Dan

More information about the distcc mailing list