[Dnsmasq-discuss] Unseen cache limit?

Simon Kelley simon at thekelleys.org.uk
Wed Jun 3 22:41:32 BST 2015


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256



On 02/06/15 01:03, Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> Robert,
> 
> Looking at the code there is an upper limit of 10000 for
> --cache-size
> 
> -- src/option.c -- case 'c':  /* --cache-size */ { int size;
> 
> if (!atoi_check(arg, &size)) ret_err(gen_err); else { /* zero is
> OK, and means no caching. */
> 
> if (size < 0) size = 0; else if (size > 10000) size = 10000;
> 
> daemon->cachesize = size; } break; } --
> 
> I'm sure Simon has a good reason for that upper limit.  Possibly a
> cache-size of 50,000 is beyond the design goal of dnsmasq.
> 

That number isn't magic: it's the largest I tested and the the largest
that seemed sensible. If there's evidence that larger cache sizes make
sense, it could be raised.

Cheers,

Simon.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=b6PH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list