[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: account balances
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> 4: IMHO, anyone who puts cash balances in a replicable,
> organization-wide directory database with absolutely no guarantee of
> concurrency needs an immediate trip to the shrink.
Unless there is my case where I have just to update once a day
the balance from upstream and only be able to read it, not update it.
Second: it doesn't have to be _maintained_ by the ldap server,
just to be _read_! I.e. I assume one could have a DB in the backend
and use LDAP just to _read_ the values. But in order to be able
to read the values trough the LDAP protocol it must have a schema
entry somewhere. At least this is my understanding.
Third: in a "one master, several slaves" only the masted may be
allowed to update the records so the problem of write concurrency
does not exists.
Could somebody tell me please if I am wrong and why ?
Ryurick M. Hristev mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Computer Systems Manager
University of Canterbury, Physics & Astronomy Dept., New Zealand