BIND 10 #2219: switch to memory-efficient version of in memory data source

[BIND 10 Development]

#2219: switch to memory-efficient version of in memory data source
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  jinmei
  jinmei                             |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:  task   |             Milestone:
                   Priority:         |  Sprint-20120925
  medium                             |            Resolution:
                  Component:  data   |             Sensitive:  0
  source                             |           Sub-Project:  DNS
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  6
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  0
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
  scalable inmemory                  |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by vorner):

 * owner:  vorner => jinmei


Comment:

 Lettuce tests fail here. I'm not sure it is related, but it might be:

 {{{
 # features/terrain/bind10_control.py:324
     A dnssec query for a.c.x.w.example. should have rcode NXDOMAIN
 A dnssec query for a.c.x.w.example. should have rcode NXDOMAIN
 # features/terrain/querying.py:204
     Traceback (most recent call last):
       File "/home/vorner/.local/lib64/python2.7/site-
 packages/lettuce/core.py", line 117, in __call__
         ret = self.function(self.step, *args, **kw)
       File
 "/home/vorner/work/bind10/tests/lettuce/features/terrain/querying.py",
 line 240, in query
         "Expected: " + rcode + ", got " + query_result.rcode
     AssertionError: Expected: NXDOMAIN, got SERVFAIL
 }}}

 Regarding the hack with configuration for the first time, this seems to be
 fragile. What if someone fixed the cause of the problem? Or if someone
 tries to use the class properly? Wouldn't it be better to remember the
 last configuration and not reconfigure in case it is the same?

 I'm not sure about the meaning of this comment. Could you explain it
 little bit more, what is happening there?

 {{{
         // If and when we allow non absolute label at the origin (e.g. for
         // the convenience of out-of-zone glue handling), we first need to
         // construct the absolute label sequence and then construct the
 name.
 }}}

 Also, I noticed some indentation that probably does not adhere to any
 style guide I've ever seen O:-).
 {{{#!diff
 -    return (ZoneFinderResultContext(code, createTreeNodeRRset(node,
 rrset,
 -                                                              rrclass,
 rename),
 +    return (ZoneFinderResultContext(code, createTreeNodeRRset(
 +                                        node, rdset, rrclass, options,
 rename),
                                      flags, node));
 }}}

 Besides that, I think the branch was rather longer than optimal, and there
 were many small and not really related changes. I'm not sure I didn't
 overlook anything (and I hope this sentence is correct in English, there
 seem to be too many negatives).

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/2219#comment:8>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development