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 elecharny@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.83.50 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <50051B34.3040200@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 09:58:44 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?RW1tYW51ZWwgTMOpY2hhcm55?= <elecharny@gmail.com>
Reply-To: elecharny@apache.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Question about Replication of Config Partition and Schema
 Partition
References: 
 <CAKjwzkp+jGxBdtBjy6Ff79gmAvgyvnRAuG7kAMK=MW5fOAaVpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADwPi+F3BBF3mRauU-1k3K1CS1yGieXY0L7d12OVxk1Pd2TGuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKjwzkrWXVwGrSDeLPAgO+ANqMh3UG07YY+Hr8YxNrr+EBwrTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADwPi+HeRa+7v_7jJnEeU9d5jzX0+O7YbuqO8vtM+txn9BPurA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKjwzkp73TMP9LB0B+ou_torGt2JiamB2W9O_v1R84ChQAHa1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <5001FAB5.5090302@gmail.com>
 <CAKjwzkrf5FXvVTZ8rp6KL8SpGRHBmxiE2=tJP6XTfW4Zd2qLvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <50043839.5010203@gmail.com>
 <CADwPi+GU9vj6J5FmDHWaYXEDkXHzRtJ1dC3o=RONf0dsdeKYdg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADwPi+GU9vj6J5FmDHWaYXEDkXHzRtJ1dC3o=RONf0dsdeKYdg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


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