[SSSD] [PATCHES] Collection, INI, Trace, DHASH

John Dennis jdennis at redhat.com
Tue Dec 8 17:43:05 UTC 2009


On 12/08/2009 12:35 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 09:51 -0500, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>>
>>> 0002 - Dhash improvement. See patch comments. (independent patch)
>>>
>>
>> I am leaning on nacking this one.
>> It is redundant and basically just duplicates code.
>>
>> The only difference between hash_lookup+hash_delete and hash_remove is
>> one less lookup, if that's the point one can simply modify hash_delete
>> to return the value, or not modify anything and use the delete_callback.
>>
>> Duplicating code is not the best way.
>>
>> Simo.
>>
>>
> Yes I looked at this one and was concerned with the same thing but I
> could not find a way to make less duplication of the code.
> I did not want to modify the existing function since I did not want to
> go hunting all the places where it might be used.
> But I also was concerned about the duplication as you are and tried to
> fund a way to use a common function internally for the two or one wrap
> another but I ended up doing what I did since I did not find a better
> way of doing things. May be I am missing something.

I think Simo's suggestion of using the delete callback in these cases is 
the best idea. If you allow returning values from the delete operation 
you have the potential for inconsistencies. How do you know if value 
returned is still valid after the delete? It might have been freed by 
the delete callback. No API changes are necessary and no performance 
impacts are encountered if you just use the callback mechanism.


-- 
John Dennis <jdennis at redhat.com>

Looking to carve out IT costs?
www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list