Re: GET_BULK questions

That is what I thought so, but actually I am getting more rows than the
max_repetitions I am giving.

And in the case when the table size is bigger than the max_repetitions, you
are implying no other indication of not able to retrieving the whole table
just the response will be stopped earlier?


>From: Magnus Fromreide <magfr@lysator.liu.se>
>To: Haizhu Liu <haizhuliu@hotmail.com>
>CC: net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
>Subject: Re: GET_BULK questions
>Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 21:15:02 +0100
>
>On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:31:51PM -0500, Haizhu Liu wrote:
> > My questions on retrieving table information using GET_BULK are:
> >
> > 1. If the max_repetitions is said to 1000, I should only see a return of
> > 1000 rows, but it seems that I do see more rows.
> > 2. If the table is huge, passed the limit of snmp message. Will there be
>an
> > indication that only partitial table is retrieved? So that further
>GET_BULK
> > is needed?
>
>Assume that you send a message:
>
>GET_BULK(non_repeaters: 0, max_repetitions:1000, column1, column2)
>
>Then you should get the 1000 items that follow column1 and the 1000 items
>that
>follows column2 in the order column1.idx1, column2.idx1, column1.idx2, ...
>
>If the resulting message gets to big it should get truncated early.
>
>See RFC 1905, 4.2.3 for further discussion.
>
>/MF




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own
Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...et-snmp-coders