Hi,

currently, all the index we create have two underlying tables : forward 
and reverse. As we have seen, it's sometime spurious to have a reverse 
index (like for the presence index, the entryUUID or ObjectClass)

W can modify slightly the implementation to have index instance having 
only a forward table, by adding a boolean flag in the constructor :

     /**
      * Creates a JdbmIndex instance for a give AttributeId
      */
     public JdbmIndex( String attributeId, boolean withReverse )
     {
         super( attributeId, withReverse );
         initialized = false;
     }

and in the init() metjod, if the flag is true, we create the reverse 
index, otherwise we don't.

This does not modify a lot the interface, plus it's easy to modify the 
methods that use the reverse table :

     /**
      * {@inheritDoc}
      */
     public void drop( Long entryId ) throws Exception
     {
         // Build a cursor to iterate on all the keys referencing
         // this entryId
         Cursor<Tuple<Long, K>> values = reverse.cursor( entryId );

         while ( values.next() )
         {
             // Remove the Key -> entryId from the index
             forward.remove( values.get().getValue(), entryId );
         }

         // Remove the id -> key from the reverse index
         if ( withReverse )
         {
             reverse.remove( entryId );
         }
     }

Here, before removing the entryId from the reverse table, we check that 
the withReverse flag is true.


Really, it's quite simple. I have experimented this modification, with 
the presence, objectClass and entryCSN index configured to have no 
reverse index, and all the tests are passing green :

     protected void setupSystemIndices() throws Exception
     {
         // add missing system indices
         if ( getPresenceIndex() == null )
         {
             Index<String, Entry, ID> index = createSystemIndex( 
ApacheSchemaConstants.APACHE_PRESENCE_AT_OID, partitionPath, NO_REVERSE );
             addIndex( index );
         }
     ...

Should I commit the change in trunk, or should I do that in a branch ?

-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com