At 02:06 PM 3/23/2005, Curt Blank wrote:
Thank you for your reply.
Yeah I was leaning towards one of your three solutions as a temporary
fix so I could do the upgrade. Before I attempt it though (already been
looking at the code) and target the structuralObjectClass issue and
optimistically say successfully address it, anything else then going to
bite me in the butt?
The problem with your upgrade approach, as I see it, is that the
2.0 server may not only have bad data in it, clients may
continually be adding bad data to it. So, even if you were to
modify slurpd(8) (I don't recommend solutions (1) or (3)) to
generate structualObjectClass values, you have to deal data for
which slurpd(8) can deal with programmatically.
I recommend (2) over (1) and (3) because it keeps the (temporary)
hacks out of the servers. I recommend against (3) as that would
lead to the hacks becoming permanent, it would (in effect) back
out many of the data consistency bug fixes that 2.2 was intended
Personally, I prefer to either replacing everything at once
(which can be done quite quickly if necessary... and, if done
right, allows for switching back if something were to go wrong)
or to replace master first.