directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <>
Subject Re: [1.0.0 -> 1.0.1 Migration]
Date Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:17:23 GMT

Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Hi,
> we have had a discussion recently about the path we must follow when 
> migrating from 1.0.0 to 1.0.1 (when this version will be released). Some 
> tricky points have been raised :
> 1) Last changes to Attribute(s) have mad impossible to reuse the data 
> stored in a 1.0.0 ADS. This is my fault, and I think the best thing 
> would be to revert to the previous names for those classes (it was 
> LockableAttribute(s)Impl, renamed to Attribute(s)Impl). Of course, I 
> will also get rid of the added field in Attributes, which is not really 
> critical (it was added to be compliant with the JNDI interface, to 
> support case sensitive attributes name, and this is obviously a nonsense 
> in LDAP context). Last, not least, as those data are serialized, I must 
> be sure that the serialVersionUID are the same for those serializable 
> classes. This should do the trick. Did I missed anything ?

No that sounds good E.

> 2) We have some user who emitted some concern regarding their existing 
> configuration and data. We should insure that both server.xml and 
> are not overwritten by the new one. This also include 
> schemas, and of course, data. I'm pretty confident that we could have a 
> new installer handling such burdens, but what we need is a volunteer to 
> modify it and tro check that it works well... Shemas migration could be 
> trickier... Any volunteer ?

This will not be easy to do.  Like I said for upgrades we should ask 
people to use LDAP studio where we can replace jars only and massage the 

> 3) Another idea would be to first export all the dataz from the current 
> 1.0.0 install, and reimport them into the new 1.0.1 install. Guess how 
> long it could take with millions of entries ... However, do we have any 
> user with more than a few thousands entries ?

Right this is in general a lousy thing to have to do.  5 million entry 
additions takes a few hours (~4).  It will be unacceptable in most large 
directories and companies.

> 4) At this point, it would be good to know about real users, to be sure 
> that they are not impacted during migration process, and that we can 
> dedicate some time to support them. Even better if some of the 
> courageous ('First Mover Advantage') users can be alpha-testers ... wdyt?

Yes that would be nice.

> 5) It would be really great if we can coordinate a release with a newer 
> version of the site and of the doco. I must admit that Doco has been 
> really improved since 1.0.0, but the site still suX (tm). Any volunteer?

Yeah this is really critical for us.  Why have we not switched yet to 
using confluence instead of the maven site?


View raw message