Shibboleth Developers

[Scott Cantor <>]

André Cruz wrote:
> I don't understand why we have to wrap the in-memory cache.

Then you'll have to reimplement all the SAML query logic. That code is 
inside the cache in 1.3.

> Surely this 
> can cause the in-memory cache to become stale in some situations?

Some of the changes I thought were in 1.3 are not, they were coded up 
afterward and have since been thrown away for 2.0. That is one of the race 
conditions left in 1.3. The timestamp gets updated in the database but you 
will not have cache coherency.

> Anyway... In 1.3 the only caches that need to be distributed are the 
> session cache and replay cache found in shib-mysql-cache.cpp, right?

Yes.

> Is this too much fantasy?

You might have more luck just sharing a single shibd on a private back-end 
server across all of the front-ends, as somebody recently was asking about. 
No coding required.

-- Scott