[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Incosistent config after schema modification
Hi Michael,
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:04:22AM +0100, Michael Ströder wrote:
> Ervin Hegedüs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:17:47PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> >> --On Wednesday, January 10, 2018 9:11 PM +0100 Ervin Hegedüs
> >> <airween@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> is there any relevant difference between the replace and
> >>> delete/add methods, which triggered this state in the DB?
> >>
> >> Jon already answered that. When you use replace, it replaces *all* values
> >> with what you supply in the operation.
> >
> > but he wrote the answer for MULTI-VALUE's attribute, but I'm
> > useing SINGLE-VALUE - or em I missing?
>
> While the attribute types you're defining might be SINGE-VALUE the
> attribute 'olcAttributeTypes' you're adding the attribute type
> descriptions to is indeed multi-valued. Otherwise you could not add
> multiple values (here attribute type descriptions) to it.
meantime turned out to me, that in first answer Jon talked about
the more-that-one attributes, when he wrote "You cannot use a
replace operation to replace individual values of a multi-valued
attribute". I mixed out these concepts.
> >> Don't use replace.
> >
> > right, after this issue I'll never use it :).
> >
> > But I still don't understand, that when I replace the *all*
> > values to the supplied type(s), then why disappears the "other"
> > attributes, which weren't listed in transaction?
>
> Because that's how LDAP modify operations with MOD_REPLACE work.
>
> See description of "operation" herein:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4511#section-4.6
thanks, perhaps the relevant part is this:
replace: replace all existing values [...] A replace with no value
will delete the entire attribute if it exists.
> Also it's a good idea to take a look at Howard's draft about ordered
> entries and values because 'olcAttributeTypes' is declared with X-ORDERED:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chu-ldap-xordered
I'll check it out - thanks.
Anyway, I'm doing fine the modifications of schema :).
thanks for all,
a.