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? > 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
