On 4/10/06, Michael Donohue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I submitted an improved randomized algorithm a while back: > http://lists.samba.org/archive/distcc/2005q1/002957.html > > It requires fewer probes of the locks to find a successful host, and allows > some degree of load balancing based on the number of slots available.
We benchmarked it. It was a bit slower than the one I selected, believe it or not. I can explain why if you're curious. (I'd have to think back and ask Dongmin, who did the benchmarking.) - Dan -- Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv __ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc