Wes,
as you may have noticed, I've just submitted a couple of
patches to extend the behaviour of your "stash_cache" helper,
and allow it to work with stash-ignorant MIB modules.
But there are a couple of things I wanted to check with you
regarding the basic handler-chain architecture.
Firstly, adding this stash-caching to an existing MIB
relies on injecting the stash-cache handler *after* having
registered the handler chain with the main agent (so that
the stash-cache kicks in before the normal processing).
This seems to work OK with my simple tests (using the
scalar helper), but I thought I'd better check whether
this was regarded as safe.
Secondly, I've tweaked the stash-cache handler to automatically
inject the new stash-to-next handler into the chain if it
detects that this is needed. This involved manipulating the
'next' and 'prev' links directly, which feels:
a) ugly, and
b) potentially unsafe
Can you suggest a better way?
Any other thoughts on this?
Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
