Mailing-List: contact users-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@directory.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of akarasulu@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.44.28 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=gf5vrQIDHXV6PHFMGyG6VsmL+gpjLQpaXsNt67SlDQNm/o+ixbDkvKrpV2bf/oxOyH
         WgvGhyFni06S8IiJi8kXYP9jMAvy3N3Rex3FyxOVuefNufQ5CspDgnin0kKJySbU03Et
         JqXYisoVcxCMRDje+oQGkKh0z3bnKcoFeLlwo=
Message-ID: <a32f6b020807090707g38f39f65lb08b5650f0d25035@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 10:07:42 -0400
From: "Alex Karasulu" <akarasulu@apache.org>
Sender: akarasulu@gmail.com
To: users@directory.apache.org
Subject: Re: Transaction for interceptor
In-Reply-To: 
 <EFBD5C230E22D74CB1317BB67979F88D059D4ABB@pine-mbpf1.global.avidww.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_3521_5020164.1215612462751"
References: <a32f6b020807090658kb357803r6ae4254a1d6692e6@mail.gmail.com>
	 <EFBD5C230E22D74CB1317BB67979F88D059D4ABB@pine-mbpf1.global.avidww.com>

------=_Part_3521_5020164.1215612462751
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Back links are a future feature we're thinking about.  I forget what AD
calls it but it essentially allows something like a group to be referenced
by the entries it refers to.  There are many things we'd like to do here on
this front - just a matter of time.

It is not possible now unless you write some code yourself and it could get
involved (meaning you might need to make some deep changes in the heart of
the server to accommodate).  On the bright side we're very well poised in
1.5.x though to add transaction support to ApacheDS to provide the atomicit=
y
you're looking for.

Alex

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Tanja Ertl <Tanja_Ertl@avid.com> wrote:

> Hi Alex,
>
> does this mean, it is not possible now, but will be in a future release?
> Or can we do this ourselves using this "back links" right now?
>
> Thanks,
> Tanja
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: akarasulu@gmail.com [mailto:akarasulu@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alex
> Karasulu
> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 3:58 PM
> To: users@directory.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Transaction for interceptor
>
> This is something we actually planned to implement using back links.  And
> yes atomicity would be needed and can be achieved.
>
> Alex
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Tanja Ertl <Tanja_Ertl@avid.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > with transactional I mean that the origin action and the work done in t=
he
> > interceptor is an *atomic* piece of work. If one fails, the other shoul=
d
> not
> > be succeeding, too. Like a transaction in database context.
> > One of our use cases is that our users need to maintain a memberOf
> > attribute, where all groups of the user are listed. This should be
> tracked
> > by an interceptor. If you add a user to a group the interceptor should
> > update the memberOf attribute of the user entry. This should only happe=
n,
> if
> > the original request succeeds. That's no problem, the interceptor could
> > start the work after the nexus has executed the request successfully. B=
ut
> > vice versa, if the interceptor fails to add the group to the memberOf
> > attribute, the original request should be rolled backed, too.
> >
> > Bye,
> > Tanja
> >
> >  -----Original Message-----
> > From: Emmanuel Lecharny [mailto:elecharny@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Emmanuel
> > Lecharny
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 2:34 PM
> > To: users@directory.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Transaction for interceptor
> >
> > Tanja Ertl wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > we would like to add our own interceptor to the ApacheDS interceptor
> > > chain to do some work when new entries are added/deleted,...
> > >
> > That's should not be complex. We are around if you have any problem or
> > questions !
> > > Is there a way to make this transactional with the "real action"?
> > >
> > Can you define a little bit more what you mean by 'transactional" ?
> >
> > It would also help to know which kind of modification you will do in
> > this added interceptor.
> >
> > Thanks !
> >
> > --
> > --
> > cordialement, regards,
> > Emmanuel L=E9charny
> > www.iktek.com
> > directory.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>

------=_Part_3521_5020164.1215612462751--