> Opinions, all?
The scripting solution would indeed solve the original feature request
in my view. But there's a new point that is now coming into scope.
Just to give the magnitude here I came across lists with 1.2M domains,
40MB uncompressed pre 'address=//' formatting. Loading such a list
consumes about 100MB of RAM.
For the sake of ads/domain blocking I have identified two metrics:
a) storage
b) RAM
We normally have two common scenarios:
1) routers without mass storage
2) routers with mass storage available (e.g. USB)
for case 1) the script solution would help both a) and partially b) as
storage is essentially RAM on those devices.
for case 2) though only a) is affected and somehow not that important here.
Using the script solution I have the feeling that we are still going to
get the full syntax 'address=/domain.com/' in RAM. But if it was dnsmasq
to give a different interpretation to the cached data though, so that
only domains or perhaps a very shorten syntax (e.g. -domain.com) can be
used, I would expect this to result into a demand reduction on b).
_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
https://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
