Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 65502 invoked from network); 15 May 2009 09:23:39 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 May 2009 09:23:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 47004 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2009 09:23:39 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 46933 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2009 09:23:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 46925 invoked by uid 99); 15 May 2009 09:23:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 May 2009 09:23:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.71.152.235] (HELO lirone.symas.net) (64.71.152.235) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 May 2009 09:23:27 +0000 Received: from [76.91.220.157] (helo=[192.168.1.29]) by lirone.symas.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1M4tdC-0006vT-RO for dev@directory.apache.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 02:23:06 -0700 Message-ID: <4A0D3474.9090407@symas.com> Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 02:23:00 -0700 From: Howard Chu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; rv:1.9.1b5pre) Gecko/20090514 SeaMonkey/2.0a1pre Firefox/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Apache Directory Developers List Subject: Re: [index review] System indexes References: <4A0BE9EC.5080707@nextury.com> <4A0C96E7.6070703@nextury.com> <4A0CA9E8.7070008@nextury.com> <4A0CF166.1040809@gmail.com> <4A0D2B22.8040405@nextury.com> In-Reply-To: <4A0D2B22.8040405@nextury.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > Currently, ObjectClass, entryCSN and UUID are considered as user index. > A decent LDAP server can't work well without any of those index. This is > obvious for the ObjectClass attribute, but replication heavily depends > on the two other index. > > UUID and entryCSN must be System index. ObjectClass should also be a > System index, I think. > > We already discussed about this, and agreed that UUID and entryCSB must > be system index, so we will do the modification. I want to see if you > feel the same for the ObjectClass index. > > One more thing : UUID and entryCSN are single valued attributes. We may > want to store them in a Hash instead of a Tree. This has to be > evaluated, I guess... Considering that the most straightforward syncrepl mechanism involves turning a poll into a search on (entryCSN>={cookie}) I think you're going to want to use an ordered index (e.g. Btree) for entryCSN... -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/