directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DIRSERVER-1619) Rdn is not required to be stored in ServerEntrySerializer
Date Tue, 17 May 2011 18:27:47 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1619?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13034944#comment-13034944
] 

Alex Karasulu commented on DIRSERVER-1619:
------------------------------------------

Initially I thought putting the parent ID into the entry might be problematic for move's of
entire subtrees causing several master table accesses. However this is not the case. The access
will occur just on the node being moved and not on it's descendants. So this is a "safe" idea
but what  benefits were you thinking of when deciding to include the parent ID in the Entry?
  

> Rdn is not required to be stored in ServerEntrySerializer
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DIRSERVER-1619
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1619
>             Project: Directory ApacheDS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core
>    Affects Versions: 1.5.7
>            Reporter: Rajesh
>            Assignee: Kiran Ayyagari
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.0-M1
>
>
> In ServerEntrySerializer Rdn is also being serialzied. And when we are trying to lookup
Entry from the AbstractTable, we are not using the Rdn or even the Entry to construct the
Dn. Dn is being constructed using Rdn Table. 
> So it will improve performance a bit if we don't save the Rdn at all.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message