Re: mib2c.table_data.conf, cache timeout period does'nt seems to change.
Dave Shield <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.net-snmp.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAKoMtGZ13X9MLuK+oYcv=qH=HS2Hziv_V=1PiAoK5dAcrt8dCg@mail.gmail.com> |
On 10 February 2012 15:02, Francois Bouchard <[email protected]> wrote: > Is there defference in the code using mib2c -S cache=1 -c > mib2c.table_data.conf myTable instead of > mib2c -c mib2c.table_data.conf my myTable, option 1) ? Errr... that second form looks invalid. mib2c only takes a single root OID. It would either be mib2c -c mib2c.table_data.conf my or mib2c -c mib2c.table_data.conf myTable Not both. I'm not quite sure why you're being asked questions (unless it's because of the invalid invocation) - table_data is a single, non-interactive configuration. But to answer your question - yes, I believe -S cache=1 *is* different to "local cached copy" option Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-users mailing list [email protected] Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users