Re: ordered indexing for integers
Ralf Haferkamp wrote:
On Mittwoch, 21. November 2007, Howard Chu wrote:
> Aaron Richton wrote:
[..]
>> Yes, this might be a bit painful for the early adopters. Is there any
>> sort of magic number or similar where slapd could bail out "sorry, please
>> slapindex" if given a RE23 format database? Then at least the FAQ-O-Matic
>> could point out "use 2.4.6 slapcat then upgrade again" or some other
>> concrete procedure.
> In this case, all you'd need is to run "slapindex -qt" to recreate the
> relevant indices. (Whether that's actually faster than slapcat/slapadd, I
> don't really know. Historically it's been pretty slow...)
>
> I guess we can detect an old format index when it gets referenced, but
> currently we don't reference them until an actual search operation comes
> along. I.e., it's not something we would normally check at startup time,
> and it would be pretty awkward at runtime.
On the other hand we could even let the runtime indexer task recreate the
indexes on the fly when such an old index is discovered. ;-)
Yes, I guess so. Things will be very slow though; queries against that
attribute will have to behave as un-indexed until the indexer task finishes.
The existing hash keys won't match the new keys so they'll be useless and need
to be deleted. (But currently the runtime indexer only adds new data, it
doesn't delete old index data.)
Yeah, I agree with Michael, an automagic action here may get really ugly.
--
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/