Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of pajbam@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.178 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=sender:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        b=yAGAGq+G73g3GyHiPyOWTXkfbBx9asMGG3BfQQsItqOkQh9K4TtGNZaxG4DMiTzJ+c
         uz5/w2FhVM2ntekZBtmQNSTYlGkcaeLyW0pjTE500cMZPpOfEOU+sNzBwyIZTGlboBtc
         AEY8VLzVu8By5JI2RkVBQC7zON/ySBBrPDlNc=
Sender: Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot <pajbam@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Morning thoughts about alias handling...
From: Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot <pa@marcelot.net>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinGBMjOGfYpnvWm=ptAkrU=miTMJA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:16:08 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <83EC49D6-793A-45E8-8FCB-E1252E63FF6E@marcelot.net>
References: <4DF9CB33.8000008@gmail.com>
 <BANLkTinGBMjOGfYpnvWm=ptAkrU=miTMJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>

On 16 juin 2011, at 13:00, Kiran Ayyagari wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny =
<elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>=20
>> so I slept on the problem, and here are a few thoughts I had this =
morning :
>> - first, the alias handling can't be done in the doSimpleSearch() as =
I
>> thought, because if we do so, alias dereferencing won't be handled =
when
>> using the coreSession. It must be handled by the =
EntryFilteringCursor.
>> Remains to see how to implement that there.
>> - second, we may have some issue when an alias points to a non =
existing
>> entry. What will the cursor.next() return in this case ? The alias =
exists,
>> so the cursor.next() will move forward, to something that does not =
exist
>> (this is a Pierre-Arnaud thought).
> hmm, if the aliased entry doesn't exist the cursor shouldn't move =
forward

Yeah, what I meant in our face to face discussion with Emmanuel was that =
if you're calling the cursor.next() method after all standard entries =
have already been processed, it should not return true only because the =
next entry to process is an alias.
It should at least verify that this target entry pointed by the alias =
really exists.
This is to prevent a situation where the cursor.next() method would =
return true (based on the fact that we have an alias without checking if =
the pointed alias entry exists) and, then a call to the cursor.get() =
method could return <null> (if the pointed alias entry actually does not =
exist).

I hope it clarifies a little bit.

Regards,
Pierre-Arnaud

>> - third, we have to fix the reverter, which doe snot handle correctly =
alias
>> removal, if the entry which is pointed doe snot exist anymore. There =
is a
>> JIRA for that issue.
>>=20
>> I'll do my best today to get something done.
>>=20
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Cordialement,
>> Emmanuel L=E9charny
>> www.iktek.com
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Kiran Ayyagari