[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: basic directory structure
- To: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
- Subject: Re: basic directory structure
- From: Louis-David Mitterrand <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 18:41:13 +0200
- Content-disposition: inline
- In-reply-to: <20000428163139.56A87FF8AB@delos.apartia.ch>; from firstname.lastname@example.org on Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 12:30:33PM -0400
- References: <20000428114048.A4786@styx> <20000428163139.56A87FF8AB@delos.apartia.ch>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.1.12i
On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 12:30:33PM -0400, email@example.com wrote:
> It really boils down to how you plan on accessing and administrating
> the database. Unless you are talking a huge (i.e. millions) of records,
> it doesn't really matter if they are in separate databases.
> For example, a search can only be formed from the base of a database.
> So in method 1 you can easily search your entire database however with
> method 2 you are limited to searching each tree individually.
Aha, very true, searching is easier with the all-under-one-suffix
> Is this to be used by and internal application or something else?
Not particularly, it's just a way to store the company's various and
disseminated contacts under one roof and allow employees to easily
I was just wondering what is the "canonical" way of doing things in that
Thanks for your input,
Louis-David Mitterrand - firstname.lastname@example.org - http://www.apartia.com
Debian-Linux consulting: http://www.apartia.fr