[Date Prev][Date Next]
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
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/