Cool thanks! How about adding it to the website too?
On 4/4/07, Ole Ersoy <email@example.com> wrote:
I'll make sure I add it in the "Concepts" section
of the DAS design book.
I'll put in a JIRA to get it moved to a general area as well.
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> To clarify from previous threads ...
> A partition is a physically distinct store for a subset of the entries
> contained within a DSA (Directory Server/Service Agent A.K.A the LDAP
> server). The entries of a partition all share the same suffix which is
> the distinguished name of the namingContext from which the stored
> entries in the partition are hung from the DIT. A partition can be
> implemented using any storage mechanism or can even be backed in
> memory. A partition simply has to implement the Partition ( 1.5)
> interface and by doing so can be mounted in the server at it's
> The server can have any number of partitions (with any implementation)
> attached to various namingContexts which are published by the RootDSE
> (empty string dn "") using the namingContexts operational attribute. So
> if you want to see the partitions served by the server you can query the
> RootDSE for this information.
> Motivation For Terminology
> I decided to use the term Partition to denote this structure in the
> server rather than use the term backend. Why? Well to me the backend
> is everything after the protocol which is basically all of the core.
> The frontend is the MINA based LDAP protocol service provider. Another
> reason for this choice was the fact that a partition is a separate
> physical store that separates a subset of the entries. It partitions
> the DIT, the namespace hence the term "partition" made sense to me.
> Another crazy reason for this comes from my days as a Linux system
> developer while writing device drivers (ahhh those were the days).
> Anyways I really like to parallel the concepts of the Linux file system
> terminology since it is almost exactly the same concept but in another
> domain. Basically file system partitions which can be backed by any
> kind of random access store can be mounted at mount points on the file
> system. To me the mount point is analogous to the namingContext used to
> hang the entries stored therein off the DIT (here I'm relating entries
> to files). Note this analogy does breakdown in some places but over
> all it's a descent analogy which warranted using the name Partition
> rather than Backend.