On 2 Dec 2005, Rob Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hola. A bunch of us are using distcc here to cut down the compile time > of our development efforts. It has literally saved us days of time > waiting on gcc. > > One question though--and it may already have been answered (and if so, > my apologies, point and flame.) Is there a way you can add a hosts > parameter such that if the load of a machine is too high, a distccd will > refuse to the compile the code and the client distcc will pass the code > to the next system in the hosts line? > > Basically, we have a shared resource here of about 26 machines. People > use 5 machines at a time for testing. We like using distcc, but we don't > want to slam anyone's cpu in a performance test, nor do we want to be > constantly be be rewriting DISTCC_HOSTS. It'd be great if you could say > something like DISTCC_HOSTS = "localhost foo<1.0 bar<4.0", etc.
Is there any important reason to configure this on the client rather than on the server? The main thing this needs is for distcc to fallback to another remote server, rather than localhost, if the first chosen server refuses to accept the job. I think there is a patch which is not yet merged and released. I should do that. -- Martin
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
__ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
