Am Montag, 30. Juni 2014, 11:05:13 schrieb Matthew Mundell:
> > I have made suggestions to reduce the memory footprint of OpenVAS
> > portranges earlier. It can be decreased by a factor of two, i.e.
> > something like 24kB for our biggest default ports range.
> 
> Is this a significant saving, compared to the rest of the memory usage?

we don't use many of these objects concurrently, so I guess it is not
as significant as I suspect some arglist stuff to be.


> > Did something in peculiar prevent this change from being applied? I'm
> > refraining from applying it myself now, just in case. If not please let
> > me know. The patch is attached.
> > 
> > I didn't want to change this structure too much, but I think it's still
> > suboptimal. Comment and UUID are repeated for each subset of the range
> > though if I'm not mistaken, these are global to the range. What about
> 
> > something like this:
> This would remove the "exclude" field from the range.  It is not used but
> we thought it may be a useful feature, so we kept it as an option.  Not
> sure if Jan has any updated thoughts on this.

the intention behind this is to have a simple way to define ports not to be
touched whatever other ranges a user has configured.
Very similar to hosts where we apply this actively already.

So, I like to keep the opportunity to have this exception.


-- 
Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner |  ++49-541-335084-0  |  http://www.greenbone.net/
Greenbone Networks GmbH, Neuer Graben 17, 49074 Osnabrück | AG Osnabrück, HR B 
202460
Geschäftsführer: Lukas Grunwald, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
_______________________________________________
Openvas-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-devel

Reply via email to