directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Seelmann (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DIRSERVER-1619) Rdn is not required to be stored in ServerEntrySerializer
Date Tue, 17 May 2011 17:24:47 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1619?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13034902#comment-13034902
] 

Stefan Seelmann commented on DIRSERVER-1619:
--------------------------------------------

I think it is worth to keep the RDN (and additionally add the parent ID) in the entry which
is stored in the master table. This way the master table would be the authoritative source
and would contain all data required to rebuild the indices, including the RDN index.

> 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