Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Bill Longman <bill.longman@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] distcc and crossdev, anyone?
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 23:57:52
Message-Id: 4D0FED15.3090208@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] distcc and crossdev, anyone? by Peter Humphrey
1 On 12/18/2010 07:15 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
2 > On Saturday 18 December 2010 10:18:43 Neil Bothwick wrote:
3 >
4 >> I've found there's just too much overhead with distcc, plus much of
5 >> the work is still done locally.
6 >
7 > I expected that but I wanted to try it to see.
8 >
9 >> I have a couple of Atom boxes, a server and a netbook, and I've set up
10 >> a chroot for each on my workstation. In the chroot I have
11 >> FEATURES=buildpkg, using an NFS mounted PKGDIR available to both
12 >> computers, then I emerge -k on the Atom box.
13 >
14 > Maybe I'll go this way instead. Thanks for the idea, which is similar to
15 > one from YoYo Siska three days ago.
16
17 I had my Atom 330 running as a distcc client for a long time. I have
18 several other speedy CPUs alongside it so it could spray plenty of
19 compilation requests out its gigabit NIC to various much beefier
20 machines. But as Neil stated, lots of the processing still occurs
21 locally, so as you increase nodes, you need to decrease the amount of
22 compilation done locally. With such a disparity between CPU, it takes
23 less time overall to just do it the way Neil describes - make a chroot
24 and then just build it with the intention that the slow CPUs will use
25 the binary build.
26
27 You still need lots of CPU to compile, so a slow machine will still
28 compile slowly. If your client is a pokey 1.6GHz Atom and you're sending
29 jobs to two quad core 3GHz CPUs on your subnet, you'll soon see that the
30 Atom's load goes up toward 8 as it tries to bring those remote jobs
31 back. So, the four threads on my 330 get completely filled up and it's
32 dog slow. And it's even more painful when you use the preprocessor
33 because the client must zip the compile "construction" before it ships
34 it out, so you have even less CPU available for compilation (although
35 you get some of that back).
36
37 All said and done, my back-of-the-napkin and seat-of-the-pants
38 calculation tells me that I still get a _minimum_ 25% reduction in
39 overall compile times with distcc. That's my experience after using
40 distcc for almost ten years with various configurations of network and CPUs.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] distcc and crossdev, anyone? "Petri Rosenström" <petri.rosenstrom@×××××.com>