--=-8f0GY55a/Qq8n0F+gHZS
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 08:14 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 18:43 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
>> Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 18:22 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
>>>>> This needs to occur even between databases on the server, but I won=
't ask that
>>>>> it occur outside the known trees.
>>>> It's already possible for operations in one database to reference
en=
tries in a
>>>> different database, so that aspect of validation
should be fine. How=
ever, as
>>>> noted before, "validation" is generally
bogus to begin with. In part=
icular,
>>>> how do you create entries with circular references?
If you disallow =
references
>>>> to nonexistent entries, you can't set the
references until after all=
of the
>>>> entries have been created. This means that you
cannot backup a datab=
ase that
>>>> has these references and then later reload it in a
single pass.
>>> An interesting point, but I need to match the windows runtime
>>> behaviour.
>> Only when it has a visible impact on other clients. What software will=
break
>> if the directory allows you to add new entries that contain
dangling
>> references? What will break if the directory allows you to modify a re=
ference
>> attribute to point to a nonexistent entry?
>
> Sure, I'm not asking for a change to default behaviours. I'm listing
> the things that our testsuite finds are differences, and looking for
> solutions.
=20
I don't believe your proposed solution will ever be satisfactory. Entries=
with=20
circular references will also break syncrepl Refresh if the
constraint yo=
u're=20
asking for is enforced.=20
Only if you don't consider them in replication. If the backlinks are
added on each node, and not replicated, then surely you just need to
import a set of replicated data, and then in the same transaction update
the links.=20
Is there perhaps another way to implement this - say using a
search-based virtual attribute for one half of the problem?
I'm in no position to set your priorities, and my wishlist remains only
that I hope to someday be able to make this work with OpenLDAP, but
these issues remain.
Andrew Bartlett
--=20
Andrew Bartlett
http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team
http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.
--=-8f0GY55a/Qq8n0F+gHZS
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBIPpKIz4A8Wyi0NrsRAhu+AJ9fRq1o5INcGiX1ZYJTAmjmBUMBogCfQ8gC
zrbftn69NpgTvb546qKvGKA=
=kiKt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-8f0GY55a/Qq8n0F+gHZS--