commit 25a2d94974c7befd13f90e52b61e297c31ae52e9

simo idra at
Wed Sep 15 08:46:49 MDT 2010

On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 16:41 +0200, Björn JACKE wrote:
> Hi Simo,
> from 25a2d94974c7befd13f90e52b61e297c31ae52e9
>         } else {
>                 /* last_refresh newer than now, wow, someone just updated the
>                  * cache under our nose, do not do again. */
>                 return false;
> doesn't this result in a cache that never gets updated for a very long time if
> the clock was e.g. accidently being set a year in the future and being
> corrected then?

Uhmmm I guess this is possible.

> The best would be to make the cache non-persistent (if it iѕn't already...)

The DB is marked TDB_CLEAR_IF_FIRST, so it will be wiped clean on

> and use time_mono() instead of time(). This makeѕ things it keep working even
> if the clock is being set back or forth.

I think it would be indeed a better solution.
Yes, would you mind coming up with a patch that uses time_mono() ?


Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list