On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:49:25AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 19:44 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 06:45:02PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 16:04 +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > please see attached patch.
> > >
> > > While testing this patch I have noticed a little asymmetry:
> > >
> > > While SSSD being offline I added SRV record so resolving could success:
> > >
> > > Call of 'getent passwd user@ad-domain ' results in 'Cannot
proceed,
> > > provider is offline'.
> > >
> > > but calling 'getent passwd user' will try to resolve services and
ends
> > > up online (then previous call will obviously succeed too).
> > >
> > > Pavel Reichl
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > sssd-devel mailing list
> > > sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > >
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > please see rebased patch.
> >
> > Pavel Reichl
> >
>
> Looks good to me and seems to be working well. But I don't like the
> variable name too much, can we use something simpler? Maybe
> srv_retry_neg_timeout ?
Sure, maybe I was trying to be over-expressive.
New patch attached.
> _______________________________________________
> sssd-devel mailing list
> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static int be_fo_get_options(struct be_ctx *ctx,
DP_RES_OPT_RESOLVER_TIMEOUT);
opts->retry_timeout = 30;
opts->srv_retry_timeout = 14400;
+ opts->srv_retry_neg_timeout = 5;
opts->family_order = ctx->be_res->family_order;
Thank you, I've got one more question/nitpick. I wonder if 5 seconds is
too low for a timeout..maybe 15 seconds, same as the default NSS negative
timeout would be a better choice?