| 1 |
Brady Catherman wrote: |
| 2 |
> nono.. we where running using distcc across our cluster (you could see |
| 3 |
> the compile jobs running on all the different nodes.) |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Though I would not be surprised in the least if I configured something |
| 6 |
> wrong.. Plus our Mac OS NFS Servers have been... flaky.. at best. So |
| 7 |
> there might just be an issue in network file system performance. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> It appears that my experience with distcc is wrong =) Thats good to |
| 10 |
> know.. next time I have to re-build a cluster I will make sure to give |
| 11 |
> it another go and see if I can make it perform better =) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It's most useful on 100Mbit+ low-latency networks, and most apps will |
| 14 |
not parallelize beyond about -j4 anyhow, because there just isn't enough |
| 15 |
non-dependent stuff to build. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Personally, distcc is very useful for cross-compilation from a fast x86 |
| 18 |
development box to slow sparc/arm boxes. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Thanks, |
| 21 |
Donnie |
Archives