We've been experimenting with adding a cache to distccd. We benchmarked building the Linux kernel; the results show both the promise and the limitations of the approach. Here are the preliminary results (and take these with a grain of salt; we might have a few problems in our test setup yet, given the poor showing of distcc ):
150 sec test system without distcc. 110 sec. normal distcc, eight-server cluster (26% speedup over no distcc - bleh!) 114 sec. caching distcc on same cluster, first run 90 sec caching distcc on same cluster, second run (40% speedup over no distcc) -> The 4% slowdown on first run might be due to computing the SHA-1 hash of the preprocessed source code before sending it out.. We do that because we need to fingerprint the sources to decide which server to send them to. But choosing a server doesn't need such a good hash, so maybe we'll try using adler32 for that and see if it helps. Anyway, hopefully we'll have real numbers soon. - Dan -- Why won't Johnny run Linux? See http://kegel.com/linux/comfort __ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
