| 1 |
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:44:32 +0200, andrea ferraris |
| 2 |
<andrea_ferraris@××××××.it> wrote: |
| 3 |
> You're a very patient person, or your offline machine is at least |
| 4 |
> a 4 3Ghz Xeon with 4 GB RAM, or you never compiled something like |
| 5 |
> X and/or OpenOffice and some other nice little things ;-) . |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
800mhz with 256Mb ram -- why do I need a 100% up to date system? -- so |
| 8 |
X takes about 4 hours to compile, so what? -- what difference does it |
| 9 |
make? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> It is that what you're describing is a lucky, but I fear uncommon, |
| 12 |
> situation: you can afford a plus machine and you don't have different |
| 13 |
> machines and machines types to compile for. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
First of all, you can setup distcc, and have a bunch of 200mhz offline |
| 16 |
machines get anything compiled reasonably fast. But is 800mhz really a |
| 17 |
"plus machine" -- lets be realistic here... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> I think that a common |
| 20 |
> situation, with different machines and machine types and production |
| 21 |
> machines, require a big overhead either in CPU load, either to schedule, |
| 22 |
> monitor and manage the compilations for not suffering for such CPU load |
| 23 |
> increase. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Just get 1 offline machine to do that, and stick the packages on a |
| 26 |
shared package repository. Whats the problem? -- it only has to be |
| 27 |
once for a network. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> I made what you're describing, but also in my case, with the same |
| 30 |
> machines and machine types and the CPU load increase was not a concern. |
| 31 |
> I think that in most cases, with a smart monitoring, scheduling and |
| 32 |
> managing and with ccache and distcc you can get the target also in more |
| 33 |
> common situations without performance degradation in the business |
| 34 |
> services offered by the machines, but there are concerns either for |
| 35 |
> security (gcc installed everywhere to have distcc working) and the work |
| 36 |
> for managing monitoring, scheduling and control the CPU load and network |
| 37 |
> traffic increase. |
| 38 |
Again, I only have gcc on 1 machine, and no matter how slow that |
| 39 |
machine is, it gets thing compiled anyway. With ccache, updates take |
| 40 |
conciderably less time and 90% of the stuff I compile on it, gets |
| 41 |
compiled in less than an hour. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Whatever takes longer than an hour isnt a problem either since its |
| 44 |
compiled once and distributed as a binary package to all machines. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives