directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matt Peterson" <ickyd...@gmail.com>
Subject Relationship of Interceptors and Partitions
Date Wed, 03 Oct 2007 22:40:57 GMT
Greetings,

I'm trying to write a custom partition that will be used as context
partition, but I'd like to continue to use the Btree/Jdbm partition
implementation for the system configuration partition.

With a little trial and error (mostly errors), I've found out that several
methods in the JdbmPartition (used by the system configuration partition
partition) will not work unless preceeded by a corresponding "fix-ups"
provided by the interceptors.  For example, calls to to the methods in
org.apache.directory.server.core.normalization.NormalizationService must be
made, or BindDNs can not be resolved.  Unfortunately,  MyCustomPartition,
doesn't like the way that LdapDNs, attributes and filters are normalized by
org.apache.directory.server.core.normalization.NormalizationService.

 In other words, there appears to be more than at least one situation where
a correlation between interceptors and partitions is necessary, but what we
have (at least in Apache DS 1.0.x) is a design where all interceptors in the
chain are called regardles of the partition that will eventually be
invoked. To configure per-partition interception.

 Perhaps what I'm looking for is a way that I can insert my interceptor
first in the chain and then optionally skip other interceptors if I
encounter a DN or base that I know will invoke my partition?  According to
documentation for ApacheDS 1.0.x (
http://directory.apache.org/apacheds/1.0/interceptors.html) the Nexus is
called by a "special interceptor" at the end of the chain.  Therefore, it
seems very difficult to skip interceptors in the chain without also
elimintating the call to PartitionNexus ...

I suppose my real question is why ApacheDS wasn't designed so that
interceptors could (optionally) be configured for association only with a
certain suffix or partition.  This would allow the configuration flexibility
that I would need -- to use both the JdbmPartition and my own
customPartition without having to undo all of the normalization, schema,
referral (,etc) stuff in my own customPartition that I didn't want done in
the first place...

Does this make any sense?

--
Matt

Mime
View raw message