BIND 10 #2282: implement specialized additional handling in in-memory data source

[BIND 10 Development]

#2282: implement specialized additional handling in in-memory data source
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
                   Reporter:         |                 Owner:  jinmei
  jinmei                             |                Status:  reviewing
                       Type:  task   |             Milestone:
                   Priority:         |  Sprint-20121009
  medium                             |            Resolution:
                  Component:  data   |             Sensitive:  0
  source                             |           Sub-Project:  DNS
                   Keywords:         |  Estimated Difficulty:  4
            Defect Severity:  N/A    |           Total Hours:  0
Feature Depending on Ticket:         |
        Add Hours to Ticket:  0      |
                  Internal?:  0      |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by jinmei):

 Replying to [comment:8 vorner]:

 > I noticed one problem with indentation here (the code and zone_data
 start at different column):
 > {{{#!c++
 >                             const ZoneNode* node, const RdataSet* rdset)
 :
 >        code(code_param), rrset(rrset_param), flags(flags_param),
 >         zone_data(&zone_data_param), found_node(node),
 found_rdset(rdset)
 >     {}
 > }}}

 Ah, good catch.  The code beginning with code has a tab.  Replaced it
 with spaces, which should fix the issue.

 > Also, can it happen one RRset is returned multiple times? For example,
 when
 > there was an ANY query and there's both MX and NS record pointing to the
 same
 > name. I don't see anything preventing the second copy to be created and
 added.
 > Is it OK and handled on a higher level?

 It's okay.  getAdditionalImpl() is not responsible for duplicate check.
 It's done in auth's `Query` class (or whatever user of the context
 class).  After all, duplicates may exist in other sections, so even if
 getAdditionalImpl() checks duplicates for additionals it's not a
 complete check anyway.

 > If the answer to the last one is it is solved somewhere in the auth
 query
 > processing, I think the branch is ready for merge (with the fix of
 > indentation).

 Okay, thanks.  So we should be almost ready.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/2282#comment:9>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development