Re: size/time limits

[Andrew Findlay <andrew.findlay@skills-1st.co.uk>]

On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 11:44:32PM +0000, Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
> >Not at all - if you request a limit of ten entries and you get ten
> >back, the sizelimitExceeded status is the only way to tell that there
> >could be more if you asked for them. The client may well regard this
> >as success, as Luke points out for nssldap.
> 
> I mean: do I have to interpret exceeding the client-side sizeLimit
> the same as exceeding a server-side sizeLimit?  I'm not changing the
> behavior of slapd (not yet, at least :). 

sizelimitExceeded goes back to the original X.500 standards, and as
far as I know there was only ever one version - no distinction about
whose limit was exceeded. In fact it is easy for the client to work
out: if it gets sizelimitExceeded and less results than it asked for
then it hit a server limit; if it gets sizelimitExceeded and exactly
as many results as it asked for then it cannot tell for certain (but
it makes no difference anyway ;-)

Of course, if the client gets more results than it asked for then the
server has got something wrong, whether it sends sizelimitExceeded or not!

Andrew
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                 From Andrew Findlay, Skills 1st Ltd                 |
| Consultant in large-scale systems, networks, and directory services |
|        Andrew.Findlay@skills-1st.co.uk       +44 1628 782565        |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------