On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 20:07 -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote: > Dave> (Which then also > Dave> raises the question of whether "pass" output should be > Dave> cached or not). > > Caching... sigh... needed and a pain at the same time.
Yup. > I think caching should be done for pass assuming that it's > recent (the default of 30 seconds is probably too long for > pass scripts (unless that's changed; memory slipping away)). What I'd really like to do is to apply per-entry caching (and cache configuration) to the "pass" directives, in the same way that I have to the "extend" mechanism. Probably cached in memory (rather than a single entry on disk), and controlled via the nsCacheTable. Having done a bit of work on 'get_exec_output', I don't think that should be too difficult. But it's definitely something for 5.4ff, rather than trying to squeeze it in now! Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
