[distcc] Issue with massively parallel compilation

Martin Pool mbp at sourcefrog.net
Fri Oct 1 07:38:20 GMT 2004

On 30 Sep 2004, Wayne Davison <wayned at samba.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 10:34:04AM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> > If you have jobs that take more than 3 minutes then I should just
> > increase the compile time to more than 3 minutes.
> Perhaps the timeout value should automatically scale itself based on the
> size of the data file that was transferred.

I don't think it correlates very well, at least for C++.  You can have
fairly small files that are very hard to compile.  Conversely you
might have a lot of headers included and a lot of declarations, but
they only affect the front part of the compiler.

Probably the best solution would be for the server to send keepalive
messages to show that it's still alive.  I don't think it's important
enough to put that into the protocol, so I'll just make the timeout
longer.  I think 15 minutes should be long enough for any single file,
while still making sure that unattended builds can't hang
indefinitely.  I might try turning on TCP keepalives, though I don't
know if they can be set down to a low enough level.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/distcc/attachments/20041001/1c17a1a8/attachment.bin

More information about the distcc mailing list