Re: Glueing together backend databases - meta, glue or chain?

[Pieter Baele <pieter.baele@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Aaron Richton <richton@nbcs.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, Pieter Baele wrote:
>
> Given databases:
>
>
>> --- dc=common,dc=example,dc=org
>> --- dc=shared,dc=example,dc=org
>> --- dc=companyA,dc=example,dc=org
>> --- dc=companyB,dc=example,dc=org
>> --- dc=companyC,dc=example,dc=org
>
>
>> all slaves represent this as "dc=example,dc=org"
>
>
> it looks like a really good situation for a simple glue configuration using
> the "subordinate" keyword; see slapd.conf(5).
>

Had some problems configuring subordinate, a conflict, because of the suffix.
Can you give an example based on my example? :-S

I plan to do some contributions

> One method also worth putting on the table is hosting the single backend
> "dc=example,dc=org" on your master and selectively replicating appropriate
> portions of the DIT using appropriate filters. (Howard recently posted to
> the list on the best practices to execute this.)
>

So partial/subtree replication?
That's a nice idea, as the clients don't have access to the master.
But then an extra containers or attribute is necessary.

> "subordinate" keeps it really simple; personally I'd start
> there and ramp up only if testing/needs dictate.

I tried that approach, but can I combine "Users/People" ou's from 2
backends this way?