On Thursday, March 29, 2007 09:45:47 AM +0200 FB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bear in mind that when you do something like 'ls', your NSS module will
be called to do an id-to-name lookup for _every file_.
ls is a bad example because it doesn't ask once per file but once per UID
(-> coreutils-idcache) ;-) .
All the world is not a VAX^H^H^H^H^HLinux.
Not every ls has that optimization.
That can get real
slow if you don't cacne results or have to go out and look at a user's
home directory, open files, etc for every lookup. It makes nss_ldap
pretty much unbearable without nscd. Bear in mind that you cannot tell
the difference between something like ls that just wants a name, and
something that needs some other field or the whole entry.
I got your point. However - it's working fine here. We've got ~ 150 linux
PCs here using it without nscd and it was quite an improvement over
nss-ldap which we used before.
OK; so you haven't yet tried it in an environment where scalability is an
issue. I have at least ten times that many clients, and my site is pretty
small. Ask the folks at UMich or Morgan Stanley how that would work for
them.
I'll bet you also haven't tried it with a fileserver down.
-- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sr. Research Systems Programmer
School of Computer Science - Research Computing Facility
Carnegie Mellon University - Pittsburgh, PA
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
