[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: slapadd: which database to open
Pierangelo Masarati writes:
>Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>> There is only one
>> database into which any entry will go, based on the DN.
> Right. However, slapadd does not behave like that, right now. It
> always tries to feed database #1 (possibly skipping "cn=Monitor" and any
> subordinate database).
Right, but this doesn't mean -b/-n affects which database an entry will
be put in. It merely affects whether the attempt to add the entry will
succeed. Which is why I've been a confused by the previous messages.
>> If you just mean the user slapadds an LDIF he shouldn't have slapadded,
>> well, though. The user might do lots of things he didn't intend to,
>> like accidentally typing rm * instead of rm something*.
> rm has noclobber to prevent misuse. slapadd has -b/-n.
s/noclobber/-i/. (noclobber prevents redirects from overwriting.)
And we are talking about the case of not using either option.
>> Besides, the slapadd can succeed already since there already is a
>> default database to try.
> Right. I don't quite like that behavior (I don't like defaults, unless
> they are very intuitive and trivial, and yes, what's intuitive and
> trivial can be very subjective, so I don't like much defaults)
I agree, which is why I suggested to remove it:-) But removing the
default without adding auto-choice would be an option too.
The default wasn't much of a problem before, but with the addition of
cn=config people will need to play with multiple databases.
Anyway, let's see for now if your improved error helps helps.