Re: Is the Redhat's openldap distribution broken?

[Tony Earnshaw <tonye@billy.demon.nl>]

tor, 25.11.2004 kl. 13.55 skrev Bruno Negrão:

> I'm starting to use redhat's openldap and I still didn't notice any 
> problem. Does someone know any problem related to the redhat's openldap 
> distribution?

2.0.27 will work and continue working together with other RedHat
machines, up to today's versions, but:

- It will not work well with other servers running the latest stable
Openldap versions (replication)
- It has fewer replication possibilities than 2.2
- The back-end database will keep growing and growing (sparse files)
 - If the database (ldbm) becomes corrupt, you cannot repair it
- It is much slower than 2.2 (database backend) and can't stand the
loads that 2.2 can (you get horrible things happening with an smtp
server under heavy load, for example)
- It has far fewer backends than 2.2
- If you build up a sizable directory and later on decide to upgrade to
a later version using an ldif base, you'll find that a PITA
- It has far less possibilities for ACLs than, for example, 2.2
- RHAS/RHEL4 will use an up-to-date Openldap version (if RedHat doesn't
go off its head and implement Netscape Directory Services instead)
- It doesn't have the SASL support that 2.2 does
- Its pam/nss_ldap gives fewer possibilities than later versions
- You'll get no support from RedHat, nor people on this list when things
go wrong or you need more than a modicum of help.

 > Am I suposed to remove it and reinstall
>  openldap from the source?

That\s what I do, for all RHAS/RHEL3 installations I carry out. OL
2.2.17/8 is rock stable, fast, reliable and supported ;)

--Tonni

-- 
The bottom line is, that after setting the cart among the pigeons, at the
end of the day I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel

mail: tonye@billy.demon.nl
http://www.billy.demon.nl
 
They love us, don't they, They feed us, won't they ...