On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 06:39:33PM +1000, Jamie Wilkinson wrote: > Yeah, but surely it should only be defined in one place?
[ ... ] > That's what I thought you were doing, so as it's not really a max value, but > more a cache closed threshold, perhaps you could change its name to > CACHE_CLOSED_THRESHOLD ? :) Ok, ok, ok, i'll clean it up ! =) Cheers, Paolo
