directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Relationship of Interceptors and Partitions
Date Thu, 04 Oct 2007 16:10:55 GMT
Also at some point we may include two sets of operation parameters.  One set
is the
original set of parameters for the operation without any alterations taking
place such as
those with normalization or other optimizations.  Another set will be the
same parameters
tweaked by the system which should be applied by partitions.

These are considerations for our bigbang branch which is refactoring
the 1.5line for a
2.0 release.  I think by providing the original request objects in the
operation context as
well as the modified versions of them your problem will probably go away.

Still though feel welcome to follow this activity to make sure your needs
are met as
we change the server's architecture.  Any recommendation or involvement
would be
highly appreciated.

Alex

On 10/4/07, Matt Peterson <ickydude@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ok.  I will.  Thanks.
>
> On 10/3/07, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Yes I understand. If you would like to implement this bypass capability
> > based on the target DN then feel
> > free to submit a patch.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> >
> > On 10/3/07, Matt Peterson <ickydude@gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.NormalizationServicemust 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