[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Operational attributes in ldapsearch vs. in slapcat

To: TechnoSophos <technosophos@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Operational attributes in ldapsearch vs. in slapcat
From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:36:43 -0700
Cc: OpenLDAP-software@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <70fbbb000608222139u3b487eb0ld322e5632bd3dc1c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <70fbbb000608222139u3b487eb0ld322e5632bd3dc1c@mail.gmail.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20060716 SeaMonkey/1.5a

TechnoSophos wrote:

How come the list of operational attributes from slapcat does not
include the three operational attributes (entryDN, subschemaSubentry,
and hasSubordinates) that are returned with ldapsearch when the + attr
list is specified? Is this a bug or by design?

Those attributes are generated on the fly, not stored in the database. slapcat just displays what is stored in the database. Both entryDN and hasSubordinates are totally redundant, their only purpose is to be targets of ldapsearch filters. One could make an argument that subschemaSubentry ought to be preserved, but at present we don't allow different schema over different subtrees so it's redundant too.

--
 -- Howard Chu
 Chief Architect, Symas Corp.  http://www.symas.com
 Director, Highland Sun        http://highlandsun.com/hyc
 OpenLDAP Core Team            http://www.openldap.org/project/

References:
- Operational attributes in ldapsearch vs. in slapcat
  - From: TechnoSophos <technosophos@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Operational attributes in ldapsearch vs. in slapcat
Next by Date: Re: Dynamic schema update
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread