On Saturday 10 of September 2011, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@suse.cz> wrote:
Since there (AFAIR) haven't been any actual data presented in the
discussion
here are some number for my linux buildbot.
Ccache hit statistics from a buildbot is probably the least realistic example
possible. Of course the hit ratio is almost 100% when it repeatedly rebuilds
almost the same source. For normal development builds the hit ratio should be
much much lower, for many reasons (building noticeably less often and
building when something does change being the primary two). I consider even
my 40% hit ratio to be unusually high.
The only useful numbers I can see is the ~5% ccache overhead, which should
mean here the break even ratio is <10%, which I guess should be doable for
LO, but without any real numbers this is still just guesswork.
Note: when icecream is enable configure.in does _not_ auto-enable
ccache (iow if you want ccache _with_ icecream you need to actively
say --enable-ccahe or set up up transparently on your environment
I have manual setup for either/both icecream and cccache, if this was
directed at me.
--
Lubos Lunak
l.lunak@suse.cz
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.