On 5 Feb 2006, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/5/06, Jake McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 5, 2006, at 2:44 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:
> > This doesn't sound like a bad idea to me (the protocol change, not > > the compression). I don't think that many people are going to be > > running different versions of distcc/distccd to make backwards > > compatibility a problem - the rpm builds both of them - and even if > > they are, making the hash message optional seems like an obvious choice. > > Yeah. And I think I'm going to do it without adding an extra > round trip, too. The client can, if it wants, give the hash of the > sources just before it sends the actual source. > The server, when it recieves that, will reply *early* with > the compiled files rather than waiting for the client to finish sending > the source. Yeah, it's evil because the client ends up sending more > than it really had to, but if the server's quick, the client won't have > sent more than a little bit of the file before it realizes it can stop. > And it will unambiguously reduce network traffic from large files without > hurting short ones. That's an interesting idea. You could combine it with the (currently disabled?) code that feeds the compiler from a fifo, so as to stream back errors or terminate compilation in the case of errors before the client finishes sending. However I suppose failing files are fairly rare, since they will generally terminate the build, and so not worth optimizing. This will probably require changing the client to a nonblocking setup where it can check for traffic back from the server while it keeps sending. This is certainly possible, and will complicate it a bit but perhaps not too much. This may not work if you use sendfile -- you might have to sendfile in several chunks or something. Incidentally, Van Jacobson's slides from linux.conf.au might be of interest to you. It was a fascinating talk. http://www.lemis.com/grog/Documentation/vj/lca06vj.pdf http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/cgi-bin/blog.cgi/2006/01/27#vj_channels Will sending the hash first really be a problem? I would have thought an extra round trip would be relatively cheap compared to the 2MB transmission, but I'm not sure. -- 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
