Re: (Dumb?) X-ORDERED 'VALUES' question

[Pierangelo Masarati <ando@sys-net.it>]

Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:

> Maybe unrelated, but this reminds me of the issue I ran into with 
> valsort where adding ordering made it so that I couldn't search on the 
> non-weighted values

DO you mean values without {X} intermixed with values with {X}?  I'm not 
sure I understand all the implications of ordering.

> in the attr if it gets indexed, essentially 
> requiring there to be two attributes for any weighted attribute if you 
> needed indexing.  For example "ou" and a private namespace "zimbraOU" or 
> something.

p.



Ing. Pierangelo Masarati
OpenLDAP Core Team

SysNet s.r.l.
via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA
http://www.sys-net.it
---------------------------------------
Office:  +39 02 23998309
Mobile:  +39 333 4963172
Email:   pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it
---------------------------------------