[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: cn=config attributes, default values
Gavin Henry wrote:
> Sorry for top post. What about returning the defaults only with manage
> dsa set like with dynlist?
An interesting idea. Unfortunately the way things currently work, it's not
practical. The config entries are not built on-the-fly for each search
request, they're held persistently in memory (and in the underlying
back-ldif). They would need to be built on the fly to react to the ManageDSA
control as you suggest.
>
> --
> Kind Regards,
>
> Gavin Henry.
> Managing Director.
>
> T +44 (0) 1224 279484
> M +44 (0) 7930 323266
> F +44 (0) 1224 824887
> E ghenry@suretec.co.uk
>
> Open Source. Open Solutions(tm).
>
> http://www.suretecsystems.com/
>
> Suretec Systems is a limited company registered in Scotland. Registered
> number: SC258005. Registered office: 24 Cormack Park, Rothienorman, Inverurie,
> Aberdeenshire, AB51 8GL.
>
> Subject to disclaimer at http://www.suretecgroup.com/disclaimer.html
>
> Do you know we have our own VoIP provider called SureVoIP? See
> http://www.surevoip.co.uk
>
> On 19 Aug 2012, at 21:14, Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com> wrote:
>
>> openldap-commit2devel@OpenLDAP.org wrote:
>>> - Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> commit 842d1b5a17d19e17bcc420d972c310a416b2000b
>>> Author: Howard Chu <hyc@openldap.org>
>>> Date: Sun Aug 19 12:49:02 2012 -0700
>>>
>>> Added delete support
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Summary of changes:
>>> servers/slapd/back-meta/config.c | 233 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> servers/slapd/back-meta/init.c | 2 +
>>> 2 files changed, 228 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> This reminds me, we still don't have a clear policy on how cn=config should
>> present settings that have their default value. Personally I would prefer that
>> settings at their default value not be displayed. Unfortunately the semantics
>> get rather muddled.
>>
>> Deleting a value should always mean returning it to its default setting. In
>> the case of back-meta, per-target configuration can be initially inherited
>> from the base configuration. The question then is, when you've allowed a
>> target config to take the setting from the base, do you expect future changes
>> to the base to also change the targets? It's similar to the referential
>> integrity problem. My feeling is that it's not worth the trouble to maintain
>> such a thing. Which probably means we should always return all attributes and
>> values in cn=config all the time, so that all values are explicitly configured.
>>
>> Other opinions?
>>
>>> ---
>>> http://www.openldap.org/devel/gitweb.cgi?p=openldap.git
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -- 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/