On 14.02.19 12:38, Pascal Christen wrote: > Ok I just downgraded and it was much better. Did a patch from 2.1.27 to > 2.1.29 had impact on the performance? Because the performance of 2.1.27 > is much better compared to 2.1.29 and that's mayeb the reason the users > don't get added because of slow performance and locking issue. > > With 2.1.27 I had 2 of 100 Users that were not added. Witch 2.1.29 I > have ~30 of 100. > > Greetings Pascal > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Mailman-Users mailing list [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users > Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 > Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 > Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/pascal.christen%40hostpoint.ch
Hi again Ok I got it. I've just reviewed the patch (https://launchpadlibrarian.net/379908276/patch.txt) for CVE-2018-13796 and found that line: + longest = max([len(x) for x in list_names()]) So at every request it gets ALL lists and saves the length of the longest list into "longest". This works well if you have 1 list, but what if you have about 10'000? Not very well guys :D Currently I have no smart idea how to rewrite the patch. Can you think of something? For our use case I adjusted the patch and our problem is solved Greetings Pascal ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
