Stephane Enten writes: > On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 03:35:37PM +0100, Olivier Poitrey wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Authdaemon system don't seem to have any cache system. For authmethod that > > need database access, I think that it's not really powerfull. What about > > implementing a cache mechanism in authdaemon ? > > > > I'm sorry if it is already in the TODO list. > > What about this unanswered request ? > > I think many of us using some database (ie. MySQL or LDAP) would really > like to have authdaemond make use of the fact that he's persistant.
It already does. It keeps a persistent database connection open. > When it comes to tens or hundreds of queries per second, having some > caching would save us some serious load on the database server(s). Before you design these kinds of grandiose schemes, try to do some analysis first. Caching will only work if you get the same requests, over and over again. Unless you have lusers that try to log in hundreds of times per second, caching only adds unnecessary complexity, opportunities for more bugs to fester around, and you won't end up saving anything since nearly every request won't be found in the cache, and you end up going to the DB anyway. So, exactly what do you expect to get from caching, really? > Another great benefit of a caching engine would be that DoS'ing the > database by hammering the services with authentification requests would > become a lot more difficult. There are other things in both the IMAP, POP3, ESMTP, and Webmail servers that are designed to prevent these kinds of attacks. -- Sam _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
