Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!ccvaxa!aglew
From: aglew@ccvaxa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Are links as useful as they could b
Message-ID: <1900036@ccvaxa>
Date: Fri, 10-Oct-86 21:07:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.1900036
Posted: Fri Oct 10 21:07:00 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Oct-86 05:47:33 EDT
References: <21127@rochester.ARPA>
Lines: 16
Nf-ID: #R:rochester.ARPA:21127:ccvaxa:1900036:000:769
Nf-From: ccvaxa.UUCP!aglew    Oct 10 20:07:00 1986


> If you are willing to expend large amounts of space, the symlink
> loop checks can be made rigorous, e.g., by remembering each symlink
> inode and requiring that no one appear twice.  The eight-links
> limit seems to work well in practice, though, particularly since
> symlinks slow name translation markedly.
>  
> Chris Torek

As a compromise between counting and remembering paths, don't fail before
at least N=8 symlinks, and hash the remainder into bits in as long a mask
as you care. The hashing overhead might be worth it if it saves more name
translations - AND if you want to have symlink paths longer than N=8 a lot.

Andy "Krazy" Glew. Gould CSD-Urbana.    USEnet:  ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!aglew
1101 E. University, Urbana, IL 61801    ARPAnet: aglew@gswd-vms