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

Re: Choosing OID for overlay config

Gavin Henry wrote:
Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
Then next on my list is to add a local db search to translucent.c so you
can search for attributes not just on the remote db.
I think this was already discussed.  I think a big issue about that is
that with complex filters (even with simple, if part of the values is
local and part remote) need local + remote data knowledge at candidate
selection.  As a consequence, there's no (simple) way search candidates
can be selected if part of the filter relies on local data.  I don't see
this an easy task from a theoretical point of view, not just in terms of
implementation.  For example, this is basically what prevents back-meta
from building entries by joining partial entries residing on different
remote servers.

Ha! A bit ambitious of me then I think. I should have realised if it was
simple enough, it would have been done.

Yes, we spent a bit of time on this already. It's feasible to separate the filter into a local and remote part if you configure a list of local-only attributes. But joining the two result sets requires double the memory; you must keep a sorted list of both search results and join at the end.

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