[distcc] Limiting cpp0, randomizing hosts, more verbose localhost lockfile names

Martin Pool mbp at sourcefrog.net
Mon Apr 4 13:20:40 GMT 2005

On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 13:04 -0700, Donohue, Michael wrote:
> I've found the FAQ has a couple questions about NFS.   Namely, "Files
> written to NFS filesystems are corrupt" and "distccmon doesn't work on
> NFS"
> These seem more like warnings than prohibitions, and indeed, we haven't
> had any problems with object files full of zeros, and distccmon has been
> modified here so that it doesn't do orphan detection.  Instead the
> status files get removed after a minute or so.

Right, they are just warnings; more to stop people saying "distcc
corrupted my files" when it's NFS's fault than "thou shalt not..."

The orphan detection thing is probably excessive; just checking the time
is probably enough.

> I'll try some tests tonight when our developers aren't all using the
> machines, to compare a network mounted lock directory to a local one,
> but I have no evidence that getting a lock is causing any performance
> problems, so I will be surprised if there is a difference.

If NFS is solid in your environment then it's fine for you to use it.
But in my experience and from reports of distcc users the majority of
NFS setups are rather fragile.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/distcc/attachments/20050404/398712c6/attachment.bin

More information about the distcc mailing list