I try to affect an uri constraint on an attribute that storing the DN of
another object but I don't know what I have to put on the attribute
field of the URI. Have any of you already implemented such a constraint?
Constraint example for a attribute that storing another attribute value:
olcConstraintAttribute: title uri
Thank you in advance,
Benjamin Renard - Easter-eggs
44-46 rue de l'Ouest - 75014 Paris - France - Métro Gaité
Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37 - mailto:email@example.com
Forwarding for exposure - any interest?
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [OldapWS] -> Proposal of a REST Web Service for CRUD Operations
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:21:10 +0200
From: Olivier CHATOR <olivier.chator15(a)gmail.com>
I am a "long time user" of OpenLDAP core parts.
If the core is very stable, I often received some request from application developers, complaining about the lack of REST Web Service API to manipulate their
Of course, as far as I could see, there is commercial solution available to do this, or even a project using Spring.
But I could not see a simple proposal based on a simple Apache Server and "fully free" of rights.
I also saw (https://www.openldap.org/devel/contributing.html) that "The OpenLDAP Project welcomes contributions of independently-developed stand-alone
LDAP-related software packages suitable for distribution separately from existing packages (e.g., OpenLDAP Software, JLDAP, JDBC-LDAP)".
Then, I would like to propose a full Open Source first realease of a CRUD REST Web Service to manipulate OpenLDAP's Directory Objects.
I know that this first release is very limited in term of features, but I think it does the "core job", and may be a common base to be enriched to build a real
OpenLDAP REST API ?
Package available here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1s4zlTleJ1JWhQWP2kLGHtTRofpWNevS7?...
Thanks for your time reading this proposal, do not hesitate to ask if you have any question.
I need to add an index for a new attribute in an active-active replication scenario.
I know I need to run slapindex to create the index for existing entries after I changed the
configuration file (yes, still on 2.4 with slapd.conf). But what is the correct procedure to update
I'm a bit worried that the setup will become out-of-sync if I just update one server at a time.
Would it be better to stop the service on both servers and re-index the databases at the same time
before going online again?
I am working on developing a new document-oriented (XML+JSON) database, using LMDB as an engine, and I have two questions.
1. So far, it have been working really smoothly for me. But my one customer so far for the DB is really concerned about running LMDB in a virtual environment such as Docker, when performing reads and writes. Especially when mounting volumes. Their concern is because of the following caveat:
"Do not use LMDB databases on remote filesystems, even between processes on the same host. This breaks flock() on some OSes, possibly memory map sync, and certainly sync between programs on different hosts"
I think it shouldn't be an issue with Docker, but I want to be certain.
2. We have one server that updates the database, and another server with a read-only copy of the same database. Our plan was to simply copy the mdb files from the update machine to the read only machine, but we noticed that if we copy the file immediately after writing, the copy may end up being corrupted. My solution was to suspend all writing and wait few minutes before writing, to make sure everything back from memory, and I'm also using the "sync" command (not sure if it does anything here). It seem to be working, but I wonder if there is a more robust way of doing that? And also, is it safe to overwrite to the read-only server while it performs read transactions to the current file (or maybe rename it and copy to a new file with the same name)?
I face a weird situation with my LDAP syncrepl consumer ,
please advise ...
on "delete" sync state control receiving, I'm trying to search for
accesslog object with the just deleted object to use it in further
processing, but it is not available yet
though if I set delay (sleep) for 1 sec just before the search, then I
successfully receive the object
so, is it intended behavior?
here is this search:
Zeus V. Panchenko . jid:firstname.lastname@example.org
IT Dpt., I.B.S. LLC ..: GMT+2 (EET)
Ulrich Windl wrote:
>>>> Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> schrieb am 08.09.2022 um 01:34 in Nachricht
>> Steffen Michels wrote:
>>> We are considering using the mdb.master3 branch of LMDB, but it is not clear
>> to me whether the data.mdb format will remain stable. Is there a chance that
>>> another migration of all databases will be required in the future when
>> switching now?
>> Yes. It is still unreleased because additional changes to the freelist
>> format are planned,
>> and possibly a few other changes.
>> In any case, mdb_dump/mdb_load will always work for migrating to a new
> I think at some point an inplace upgrade would be the way to go.
> On Linux filesystems, you could even upgrade yout ext3 to btrfs ;-)
That will never happen here. Supporting an in-place upgrade requires the library to support
old and new formats simultaneously, which is a waste of RAM. Anything that pushes the object
code size of the hot path over 64KB is a non-starter.
>> -- Howard Chu
>> CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
>> Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
>> Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
We are considering using the mdb.master3 branch of LMDB, but it is not
clear to me whether the data.mdb format will remain stable. Is there a
chance that another migration of all databases will be required in the
future when switching now?