On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 11:07:09AM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote: > On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 02:58:48PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 11/15/2010 08:49 AM, Sumit Bose wrote: > >
........... > > Patch 0008: Nack. > > > > This might be a matter of optimizing too early, but why do we have a > > renew interval instead of just setting the tevent timer based on the > > next ticket that's due to be renewed? Is there any advantage to > > maintaining the hash table of entries? I think it would make more sense > > to just create timed events, rather than adding TGTs to a hash table. > > Then we don't have to iterate across all of them if only one is due for > > update. > > we discussed this on irc and agreed that the current approach has its > values too, e.g. helps to reduce the number of requests to the KDC. So > we keep it in the current state. > As mentioned earlier I plan to send a patch which checks all ccache files found in the cache during startup. I prefer to send this patch in a separate thread, because it will change krb5_child and I would like to avoid difficulties in applying the renewal patches, the FAST patches and this one in the right order. bye, Sumit _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
