Re: Question about syntax check and back-sql

[ZhangPu <zhang@fjh.fujitsu.com>]

Hello,

By back-sql.h list, I knew a lot of LDAP functions that you have 
enhanced with back-sql. Also I saw from 2.1.16(?) to 2.2.18, you 
had not changed the contents anymore. Do you think that you 
need to changed the "Enhancements" and "Todo"? At least, with 
the new 2.2.18, I think.

regards
Pu Zhang

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:21:52 +0100 (CET)
"Pierangelo Masarati" <ando@sys-net.it> wrote:

> 
> > Thanks for the detailed answer.
> >
> >> > It seemed like the current back-sql
> >>
> >> what's current?  what number?
> > I have used 2.2.11.
> > I didn't test it with 2.2.18.
> >
> >> What do you mean by "all"?  All objectClasses and attributeTypes
> >> typically
> >> loaded into "cn=subschema"?  No, and I don't think it is even
> >> reasonable,
> >> given the logic that is behind back-sql implementation.  If you mean a
> >> somewhat realistic example, the answer is: Yes (see below).
> > "All" meant the definition in schema file which openldap supported.
> 
> Well, in any case, for each objectClass you intend to map, you need to
> explicitly map each attribute.  For instance, if you intend to map
> "inetOrgPerson" and "organization", which both allow "description", if you
> intend to map the "description" attribute for both objectClasses you need
> a "description" entry in table ldap_attr_mappings, and so on.
> 
> p.
> 
> -- 
> Pierangelo Masarati
> mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it
> 
> 
>     SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497