søn, 2002-09-29 kl. 13:53 skrev Jesse W. Asher: > You're absolutely correct on both counts. The issue is, again, that > most companies DO need a relational database because they have a LOT > more data than what usually goes into an LDAP server. Rather than > maintaining data in two places, it would be wise to maintain it in one > place and have the LDAP server interact with the database server to > deliver its data. That's why it is useful to have an LDAP server be > able to use a database server as a backend. A deal of LDAP clients can interface, for example, Novell's eDirectory. Which is the main NetWare database for everything pertaining to a NetWare organization's data. If you'd ever seen what's possible to store in eDirectory, on an organization-wide (often Internet) basis, with whole or partial replication, on Internet-wide scale, I doubt whether you'd have written the above. It would be the database admin's nightmare. Best, Tony -- Tony Earnshaw "Growing old" is compulsory, "growing up" is optional. e-post: tonni@billy.demon.nl www: http://www.billy.demon.nl gpg public key: http://www.billy.demon.nl/tonni.armor Telefoon: (+31) (0)172 530428 Mobiel: (+31) (0)6 51153356 GPG Fingerprint = 3924 6BF8 A755 DE1A 4AD6 FA2B F7D7 6051 3BE7 B981 3BE7B981
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dette er en digitalt signert meldingsdel