[Xorp-hackers] Omitting XrlDB from Router Manager

[Ben Greear]

Bruce Simpson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>    I'm still looking at the XRL replacement since I got back from 
> holiday, which is why I've been mostly silent on lists.
>
>    Something came up in analysis, which broadly relates to Ben 
> Greear's work on reducing Router Manager startup times, etc. and some 
> of the questions Li Zhao has been asking in other threads on this list.
>
> @Ben: It would be interesting to know what difference omitting the 
> XRLDB code makes to your Router Manager startup times.
> * The XRLDB seems to exist pretty much to validate what's in the 
> template files and how the Router Manager uses them, although this is 
> done completely at run time.
> * I wonder if disabling this code would make a difference to performance.
> * To do this, I'd hack rtrmgr/template_commands.cc, and comment out 
> the calls to the XRLdb methods.
> * The rtrmgr/xrldb.cc is the only place in the whole system where the 
> '*.xrls' files are parsed and used. They are used only to validate the 
> syntax and structure of potential XRL method calls.
> * It would mean that there is no up-front validation of the XRLs, but 
> in practice, this validation step is probably only of interest to 
> people developing XORP, to catch problems with template files.
> * It's probably best folded under a compile-time #define for developer 
> use.

Something like the attached patch?

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com> 
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: xorp_xrldb_verification.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 4454 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/pipermail/xorp-hackers/attachments/20091030/28957ef2/attachment.bin