[Dev] [Cynara] Async admin API proposal

Patrick Ohly patrick.ohly at intel.com
Fri Aug 22 18:16:16 GMT 2014


On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 17:49 +0200, Bartlomiej Grzelewski wrote:
> > Furthermore, calling cynara_async_process just to get answer from
> the cache seems awkward and not something that this function is meant
> to be used.
> 
> Client should not be aware that answer is in cache. In fact cache is
> an internal cynara optimalization that should be totally hidden from
> client. Client should think that the answer was taken from socket and
> that's why it must call cynara_async_process.

I disagree about the client developer not supposed to be knowing about
the cache. It is an essential part of the Cynara design.

The cache has to exist, so why not take advantage of it.

What is currently proposed just makes the number of changes to
dbus-daemon larger, with no practical advantage. Everyone is welcome to
have a look at the work I started on dbus-daemon and verify that
statement if you don't take my word for it.

> Someone wrote:
> > "dbus daemon which was not designed to do asynchronous policy
> checking and should do such processing in place if possible".
> 
> That's ok. In this case dbus should use synchronous api
> ("cynara_check") and accept all consequences of it.

That's not an option.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.





More information about the Dev mailing list