On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 30 Jun, Oscar Plameras wrote:
> > The reason is as follows:
> >
> > Number of IPV4 addresses = 255*255*255*255 * 50 bytes (your allocation)
> > = 4,228Mb * 50 =
> > 202,280MB
>
> A cache isn't a complete copy. You store what you allow room for, and
> fall back to your normal mechanism if the entry isn't in the cache.
> You use LRU typically after the cache fills.
>
> This is all very standard stuff, and it's the technique that Solaris
> uses to get good performance. So I can't see why Linux couldn't do the
> same.
It's quite straight-forward to implement a DNS cache on linux -- run bind
on the box. Isn't this going in circles? For some reason people wanted
to get the cache off the box.
Personally I haven't found that removing bind gives a performance benefit
(quite the opposite), but different systems use resources in different
combinations, so YMMV.
Andrew
--
No added Sugar. Not tested on animals. May contain traces of nuts. If
irritation occurs, discontinue use.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew McNaughton In Sydney
Working on a Product Recommender System
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mobile: +61 422 753 792 http://staff.scoop.co.nz/andrew/cv.doc
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
