[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: Missing error codes in slapd/backglue.c:glue_back_search() (ITS#1675)
If you set it to fail if any of the backends fail then you render the glue
useless. The purpose of the glue is to allow you to perform a global
search that spans multiple backends. Very likely the thing you are searching
for will only be in one (or a few) of the glued backends, and the rest will
So my opinion is no, this should not be user definable. To change the
represents a basic misunderstanding of why and how to use it in the first
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kervin Pierre [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 12:26 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Cc: openldap-its@OpenLDAP.org
> Subject: Re: Missing error codes in slapd/backglue.c:glue_back_search()
> A question this brings up.
> With multiple backends, do we want the operation to fail if any one of
> the backends fail, or do we want the operation to fail only if all the
> backends fail.
> Should this be user definable?
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-openldap-bugs@OpenLDAP.org
> >>[mailto:owner-openldap-bugs@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of
> >>If scope != LDAP_SCOPE_BASE and a timelimit or sizelimit is exceeded,
> >>rc is returned uninitialized and something (gs.err?) should be set to
> >>LDAP_<TIME/SIZE>LIMIT_EXCEEDED. Or maybe it should only be set to
> >>*LIMIT_EXCEEDED if there is not a "stronger" error there already.
> >>Though it only pays attention to the _last_ result code in any case;
> >>that seems strange.
> > Error handling is definitely a bit of guess work. The goal was to never
> > return a fatal error code as long as any one of the backends returns a
> > valid result. However, the LIMIT errors definitely need to be
> set, thanks
> > for pointing that out.
> >>Also, rc is returned uninitialized if scope != LDAP_SCOPE_BASE and
> >>there is no backend with a be->be_search routine.
> >>BTW, after fixing this, you'll get rid of a gcc 'variable might
> >>be used uninitialized' warning if you replace the switch with an
> >>`if (scope == LDAP_SCOPE_BASE) ... else ...' statement.
> > -- Howard Chu
> > Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
> > http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc
> > Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support
> http://linuxquestions.org/ - Ask linux questions, give linux help.
> http://splint.org/ - Write safe C code. splint source-code analyzer.