[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Filesystem & backend options for embedded openldap
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Peter Lambrechtsen
> Why don't you use SQLite instead??? It's pretty rock solid backend database.
> Unless your client side only wants to talk LDAP.
Thanks the the response. One of the reasons for ldap is that it
handles all the authentication for a lot of the packages we're using
out of the box so it was a natural progression to extend it to handle
the other data we need as well.
The only probems, it appears, is how to make it more failsafe on the back end.
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 6:48 AM, Bruce Edge <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps a bit more detail...
>> During testing our developers frequently hang the target machines.
>> This usually results in a corrupted ldap database even though no write
>> activity was present on the box since long before the crash.
>> What ldap config tuning options are required to get slapd to sync the
>> backend to a state where power loss / kernel crashes do not corrupt
>> the data?
>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Bruce Edge <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> > I'm working on an embedded system for which I would like to use
>> > openldap as the means of config storage.
>> > I've spent a lot of time RTFM'ing and still feel that there is a lot
>> > that is escaping me as far as the optimal configuration.
>> > If the primary goal is data safety and zero human intervention, what
>> > would be the optimal combination of file system / backend storage /
>> > and config options?
>> > I would like to never have to manually recover a database and have it
>> > gracefully recover from power failures. Speed is not an issue as it's
>> > very low traffic. Integritiy is everything.
>> > It's target storage is a USB flash device. Are there any special
>> > considerations WRT flash storage and ldap?
>> > Thanks in advance.
>> > -Bruce