Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:15:14 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: M Farkas-Dyck <strake888@...il.com> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] support alternate backends for the passwd and group dbs On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:01:11AM -0500, M Farkas-Dyck wrote: > On 23/02/2015, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > There were multiple discussions of how to support alternate backends > > in the past, and the main two candidates were a new text-based > > protocol over a unix socket that returns the result in passwd/group > > file form, and repurposing nscd protocol. While I originally preferred > > the former, using nscd has the advantage that, on existing glibc > > systems with non-default (possibly even custom nss modules) backends, > > everything works out of the box. Using a new protocol/new daemon would > > require installing that daemon before any musl-linked binaries could > > lookup users/groups, and would require significant custom glue to > > integrate with custom site-local backends. > > For nonstatic non-nsc backends, one could alternately have files in > question on synthetic filesystem, e.g. 9p, so backend program would > simply be synthetic filesystem server and musl wouldn't need to care. Generally the only time you use non-static backends is when your user database is so huge that parsing /etc/passwd over and over would be prohibitively slow. Think of university or corporate user database with tens or hundreds of thousands of users. A synthetic filesystem does not help with this any more than a generated passwd file in /etc would help; the goal is to get rid of the linear-search-on-each-lookup performance problem. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.