On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 10:02:18 +0200 Timo wrote: TT> > As you can see on the tracker I've had a look at this patch. I stopped TT> > however because I'm not convinced that the introduction of the new flag TT> > NETSNMP_CACHE_AUTO_SYNCHRONIZED is justified. TT> TT> I added some more explanation now why it's there. I'll have time to fix TT> things on the patch today/tomorrow. Hopefully we get it in merging state TT> soon.
I think the concept you are talking about for the cache is ok, but I'm not sure that auto-sychronized is the right name. It's more of a keep-alive, isn't it? simply bumping the expiration time when the cache is used? My question with regards to this patch is whether or not it is actually doing synchronization. That is, are stale entries being removed? For true synchronization, I'd expect that if the cache expires and is released, and then reloaded immediately (before any changes to the kernel data), it would contain exactly the same data. Also, I see lots of code added and deleted. I just want to make sure that the table will still work on systems without netlink. - robert ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
