directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <>
Subject Re: Storing binary data in 0.9.1 fails (or data given back from the directory is changed)
Date Mon, 08 Aug 2005 18:43:41 GMT
> >If the bytes are above 128, you will just transform the bytes to a bad
> >Value. I think that the value, as it is supposed to be an OctetString,
> >should be stored directly without creating a new String.
> >
> >wdyt Alex ? 
> >  
> >
> Right and there will also be character encoding issues. 
> Hmmm I think this switch from using a String to using a byte[] should be 
> based on the attributeType definition.  Question is how do we get that 
> to the Rule in a safe and easy manner?

I don't know if this is a work to be done by the rule. The decoder is in
charge of the decoding, and has no clue of the attribute type, in my
mind. Instead, when pushing this newly created attribute to the DB, you
will be able to deal with the type, no? Maybe it's better to separate
those two phases, as there are pretty much different.

But I agree that we have to take care of the type. As the created Add
POJO contains all the needed information, you will be able to fetch the
type of each attributes and check if their values are OK, just before
storing them to the database.

I didn't had time to go further in the debugging process and testing of
this patch has been very very light this morning, as I had to run to my
office, I gonna check further tonite.

> Alex
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.

View raw message