directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ole Ersoy <ole.er...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DAS] Write Performance
Date Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:02:04 GMT
Cool - Sounds like this is all figured out already :-)

I'll put this mail in my "Parking lot" along with the search
stuff, so I remember to follow up later.

Thanks,
- Ole



Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Good point and actually Emmanuel and I discussed this at some point. The 
> idea was to have an extention to schema to disable validation for a 
> particular schema entity.  So basically we can have a m-disable-checks 
> attribute in the meta.schema. 
> 
> Add this to a syntax and set to TRUE and all attributes that are of that 
> syntax will not be checked.  Also we could have a m-force-checks so you 
> could add this to an attribute for example that you do wnat checks on 
> even if it's syntax is set to disable validation.
> 
> Thgse are fine tuning configuration parameters that effect he behavoir 
> of the schema validation  in the schema service.  We definately need 
> some fine grained control over the way validation is performed since as 
> you said sometimes the apps do this automatically so why pay the price 
> again in the integration layer.
> 
> Alex
> 
> On 4/21/07, *Ole Ersoy* <ole.ersoy@gmail.com 
> <mailto:ole.ersoy@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Hey Guys,
> 
>     This thought may be useful for
>     ApacheDSs roadmap,
>     although it's possible we have it covered
>     already.
> 
>     Most DAS users will want to validate
>     DataObjects prior to putting
>     them in the directory.
> 
>     I'm assuming some of the processing ApacheDS
>     does when written to includes various
>     forms of validation,
>     upping the number of hoops the data has to jump
>     through before it is stored.
> 
>     If it's possible to minimize this / switch it
>     off it will improve DAS write performance, as we
>     avoid duplicating the validation effort.
> 
>     One thing that comes to mind wrt this are Alex's
>     ADS comments with respect to plugging in new Syntaxes,
>     and other schema elements at runtime.
> 
>     Users of a "Studio" may wish to have a flag that they
>     flip, where the flag indicates where the validation takes place,
>     in ADS or the DataObject instances.  However they most likely want to
>     know that the validation performed is "Equal".  Thus it would be neat
>     to have an effort that creates parallel generic LDAP validators
>     and DataObject validators.
> 
>     These would use the same core, but could have adapters that make them
>     suitable for use in the server or directly by a DataObject either
>     as an invariant or named constraints (DataObject's support XML Schema
>     Validation Constraints out of the box).
> 
>     I need to think it through more thoroughly, but I thought I'd throw
>     it out there in case it's not completely whacked.
> 
>     Cheers,
>     - Ole
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message