We build a lot of code at Mozilla. Every time someone pushes changes to the code that makes up Firefox we build the application on multiple platforms in a variety of build configurations. This means that we’re constantly looking for ways to make the build faster–to get faster results from our builds and tests and to use less machine time so that we can use fewer machines for builds and save money.

A few years ago my colleague Mike Hommey did some work to see if we could deploy a shared compiler cache. We had been using ccache for many of our builds, but since we use ephemeral build machines in AWS and we also have a large pool of build machines, it doesn’t help as much as it does on a developer’s local machine. If you’re interested in the details, I’d recommend you go read his series of blog posts: Shared compilation cache experiment, Shared compilation cache experiment, part 2, Testing shared cache on try and Analyzing shared cache on try. The short version is that the project (which he named sccache) was extremely successful and improved our build times in automation quite a bit. Another nice win was that he added support for Microsoft Visual C++ in sccache, which is not supported by ccache, so we were finally able to use a compiler cache on our Windows builds.

This year we started a concerted effort to drive build times down even more, and we’ve made some great headway. Some of the ideas for improvement we came up with would involve changes to sccache. I started looking at making changes to the existing Python sccache codebase and got a bit frustrated. This is not to say that Mike wrote bad code, he does fantastic work! By nature of the sccache design it is doing a lot of concurrent work and Python just does not excel at that workload. After talking with Mike he mentioned that he had originally planned to write sccache in Rust, but at the time Rust had not had its 1.0 release and the ecosystem just wasn’t ready for the work he needed to do. I had spent several months learning Rust after attending an “introduction to Rust” training session and I thought it’d be a good time to revisit that choice. (I went back and looked at some meeting notes and in late April I wrote a bullet point “Got distracted and started rewriting sccache in Rust”.)

As with all good software rewrites, the reality of things made it into a much longer project than anticipated. (In fairness to myself, I did set it aside for a few months to spend time on another project.) After seven months of part-time work on the project it’s finally gotten to the point where I’m ready to put it into production usage, replacing the existing Python tool. I did a series of builds on our Try server to compare performance of the existing sccache and the new version, mostly to make sure that I wasn’t going to cause regressions in build time. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the Rust version gave us a noticeable improvement in build times! I hadn’t done any explicit work on optimizing it, but some of the improvements are likely due to the process startup overhead being much lower for a Rust binary than a Python script. It actually lowered the time we spent running our configure script by about 40% on our Linux builds and 20% on our OS X builds, which makes some sense because configure invokes the compiler quite a few times, and when using ccache or sccache it will invoke the compiler using that tool.

My next steps are to tackle the improvements that were initially discussed. Making sccache usable for local developers is one thing, since Windows developers can’t use ccache currently this should help quite a bit there. We also want to make it possible for developers to use sccache and get cache hits from the builds that our automation has already done. I’d also like to spend some time polishing the tool a bit so that it’s usable to a wider audience outside of Mozilla. It solves real problems that I’m sure other organizations face as well and it’d be great for others to benefit from our work. Plus, it’s pretty nice to have an excuse to work in Rust. 🙂 You can find the code for the rewritten sccache on GitHub.

Overall I’ve really enjoyed the experience of working in Rust on this project. Compared to working on the Python version of the tool it was nice to have static typing to catch mistakes I made in the compile phase. I’ve really grown to love Rust as a language, I miss things like the match expression when I’m working in other languages now! There were certainly some growing pains–I hit a few cases where the crates.io ecosystem just didn’t have something I expected, or the Rust standard library was missing a feature I needed, but those were not very common occurrences for me. I would definitely reach for Rust again for a project like this!