[Pdns-users] SQL implementation questions
lists at nss.wproduction.cz
Wed May 26 12:27:48 UTC 2004
I want to explain my point of view here. I thing the better place for SOA
records will be in domains table, not in records table.
1. SOA record must be for each domain
2. SOA record must be exactly one
3. we can very easy parse row and edit "id, name, master, last_check, type,
notified_serial, account, SOA, HOSTMASTER, SERIAL, REFRESH, RETRY, EXP, MIN"
4. ask for serial for master/slave can be from one row in one table
5. we can have (name,type,content) as key in records table if we move soa to
Am i wrong ?
> > The SOA record is as full text line recorded in one cell.
> Is this good
> > choice ? It can not be better to have serial, refresh,
> retry, expire and
> > minimum in separate columns or rows ? Its hard to parse and
> can be hole for
> > future editing.
> It'd be an excess pain in the ass, having to have separate
> columns just
> for that one row type. Bert doesn't seem to think the performance hit
> for parsing the SOA record's fields is significant enough to worry
> about, and it hasn't seemed to be an issue so far.
> Derrik Pates
> dpates at dsdk12.net
More information about the Pdns-users