On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 14:43 +1100, Paul Wankadia wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Ian Kent <ra...@themaw.net> wrote: > > > More importantly, who's the scapegoat? :P > > That would be me, ;) > > It seems that autofs v5 doesn't read an indirect map into the cache > unless ghosting is enabled, so I'm thinking about adding a map option > to force the read. Has the file map reloading logic changed > significantly since autofs v4?
It's a bit hard to give a good answer to that as there have been so many changes but, having said that, it shouldn't have changed much except for the obvious one that it tries not to read the entire map unless it has to. Adding the "--ghost" or "browse" option will cause it to read the entire map. Also, the internal default, which is "browse" enabled by default, is overridden by the default installed configuration with BROWSE_MODE="no" so v5 behaves the same as v4. > > > > The hash function is good now, so the size of the hash table > can be a > > power of two. > > So your suggesting 1024 then, does it matter? > > %1024 should become &1023 due to strength reduction, but it's not > overly important. > _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list autofs@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
