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

Re: Transactional ldap

Interesting thread. Have you looked into, or do you have support for
"two-phased commits"?

Thank you,

On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Marijn Meijles wrote:

: You wrote:
: > > 1. Have you ever tried to fit your needs via a sql-backend (with stored
: > > procedures and so on) ?
: > >
: > > 2. How can I define a transaction,
: > > is there a specal command into the LDIF file or something else ?
: > > (Where) Can I get a copy of it, and do you have documents about it ?
: >
: > I'am sorry,
: > but these questions probably make no sense, cause we are talking about a front end.
: > So I have to ask, in which kind do you have implemended transactions with the ldbm backend ?
: our own 'branch', although it was never the intention to branch ;) we
: started hacking away and by the time we realized we had added a lot of
: new features 2.0 was already underway.  those features would take a long
: time to forward port to the 2.x series, not to mention the time it'll
: take to stabilize the code. threading bugs are nasty ;)
: we gave the patch to the public, but it wasn't much use because it
: was against 1.2 (and rather large). our current code sports stuff like
: transactions, scoped indexing, new search heuristics, lots of bug fixes
: and speedups. the last thing I put in it is complete recoverability from
: disk full situations without bringing down (or crashing) the server.
: but, as i said, it's based on 1.2 and heavily geared towards pth and
: bdb and needs some special building instructions.
: I am still not proud of the fact that we didn't feed the patches to kurt
: one by one from the beginning, and maybe we'll do it one day. let's just
: say we were inexperienced at the time ;)
: If anybody is interested in the code, please contact me.