Thanks a bunch Christine. Sorry for being lazy - I should have added it myself. This release is taking me forever this time though. I guess I am loosing my touch.
I expanded the first section a bit and added it to the "Architectural
Overview" page of the AUG
Further comments or contributions are welcome :-)
2007/4/5, Trustin Lee <email@example.com>:
> Sounds very good!
> On 4/5/07, Alex Karasulu <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > To clarify from previous threads ...
> > Definition
> > -------------
> > 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 suffix/namingContext.
> > 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.
> > Alex
> what we call human nature is actually human habit
> PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6