directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Question about Replication of Config Partition and Schema Partition
Date Tue, 17 Jul 2012 07:58:44 GMT

Le 7/17/12 12:28 AM, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> I was pretty much thinking that we could store those informations in a
>> plain text file, but that would be a bit overkilling, when we can store
>> them in a the DIT too. Maybe storing those information sinto the ou=config
>> entry could be the right thing to do, assuming that the ou=config is not
>> replicated (we will only replicate what's under ou=config, ie, its children)
>>
>>
> Please please please let's not fuck with this. This is the worst idea I've
> heard of yet. We don't need another one off here.
That was just a suggestion, but I do agree this is more a hack than 
anything else. Plus after having checked the ou=config file, I don't 
even thinhk it's necessary.

I totally buy the fact that implementing partial replication would solve 
the issue.

The ou=config DIT starts with :

version: 1
dn: ou=config
ou: config
objectclass: top
objectclass: organizationalUnit

dn: ads-directoryServiceId=default,ou=config
objectclass: top
objectclass: ads-directoryService
ads-directoryserviceid: default
ads-dsreplicaid: 1
...

As we can see, each configuration is specific to a service, here 
"default". If we correctly name the instances so that there is no 
possible confusion between them, then we should be safe even if we 
replicate everything.

The thing we have to solve is about the instance name : how dos the 
server get its instance name ?

I must admit that, even if I worked on those thing in the past, it's not 
really fresh in my mind...

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


Mime
View raw message