Corinna Vinschen corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Fri Feb 20 20:46:00 GMT 2015

On Feb 20 13:51, Tom Honermann wrote:
> On 02/20/2015 12:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Maybe it is actually simpler than that.  Invalidating the cache as a
> >whole probably never makes sense.  In fact there are two reasons for
> >invalidation:
> >
> >- The pw_name, pw_shell, pw_home, pw_gecos settings for a user changed.
> >
> >- The interface to the DC was broken and there are entries of the type
> >   Achim mentioned, "DOM+User(RID)".
> >
> >The first case can only be fixed by invalidating the cache on a regular
> >basis.  If we didn't fetch the info for a user for, say, 5 minutes, drop
> >the entry from the cache and renew the information by asking the DC
> >again.
> >
> >As for the second case, the DOM+User(RID) entries are undesired and
> >wrong anyway.  So maybe the caching code could do what you said in the
> >first place.  Invalidate the cache on every network change.  But then,
> >only invalidate the entries of the aforementioned type.
> That all sounds very reasonable.
> >Care to hack a bit?
> Oh, if only I could.  If I had more time available, I'd have to go with more
> time to play with my kids (or sleep) :)

Sleep is highly overrated.


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20150220/fbad5cde/attachment.sig>

More information about the Cygwin mailing list