From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jun 23 08:18:43 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA02351 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 08:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zed.ludd.luth.se (root@zed.ludd.luth.se [130.240.16.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA02341 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 08:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mother.ludd.luth.se (mother.ludd.luth.se [130.240.16.3]) by zed.ludd.luth.se (8.7.5/8.7.2) with ESMTP id RAA10196; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 17:18:17 +0200 Received: (pantzer@localhost) by mother.ludd.luth.se (8.6.11/8.6.11) id RAA07110; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 17:18:16 +0200 Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 17:18:15 +0200 (MET DST) From: Mattias Pantzare To: Michael Hancock cc: denis , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dynamically Allocatable Name Service (DANS) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Michael Hancock wrote: > Who said anything about textfiles? The author claims that his work is a > rocket and BIND is a bike. I want to know why? > > I'd like to hear how he plans to handle servicing dynamic updates and name > requests with the performance required. BIND once initialized operates > entirely in RAM and the service has high performance requirements that are > hard to meet even with a static database. I think that you are missing the point. What he is doing is to store the names that the nameserver provides to other servers in a database instead of in a textfile. Not to do the name caching on disk. The whole binary database can be cached in RAM. If the names it is serving is to be uptdated automaticly, by software, a binary database will be faster. (for example if a computer is connected to the network and given an IP adress from a DHCP server, but provides it's name)