Breaking apart large zone files.

[Kevin Darcy]

Brian F. wrote:

>Kevin Darcy <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote in message news:<cne5q2$kbo$1 at sf1.isc.org>...
>  
>
>>I can't imagine that breaking the zone into separate *files* like that 
>>is going to help your reload time or performance impact, since named 
>>still needs to read in all of the data in all of the files on a reload.
>>
>>Breaking the zone up into separate *subzones*, however, if the structure 
>>of the zone permits it, should help matters, if your twice-a-day script 
>>is smart enough to reload just the subzones that have changed, the 
>>downside being that now all your slaves need zone definitions for all of 
>>those subzones, and there'll be some additional serial-checking and 
>>zone-transfer overhead incurred. Even if all of the subzones change 
>>twice a day, you might be able to stagger the subzone reloads to 
>>minimize the impact.
>>
>>It might be best to have your script make its changes incrementally via 
>>Dynamic Update -- then you shouldn't need any forced reloads at all.
>>
>>                                                                         
>>                                             - Kevin
>>    
>>
>
>
>But are there any issues with a zone file like the above? Can you have
>multiple includes for the same zone in a format like this?
>
Syntactically it should work fine. I just don't think it'll do you any good.

                                                                         
                  - Kevin