Ankur Agarwal wrote:
So 389 is the proxy server and openldap is hosting the real data? It should just work. Have you tried this configuration? If so, what problems did you encounter?I want to achieve chaining between a master and slave having exactly same OUs and are based on OpenLDAP 2.3.What would be the configuration to achieve that?
Regards, Ankur Sent from my iPhone On Oct 14, 2009, at 1:55 AM, Rich Megginson <[email protected]> wrote: Ankur Agarwal wrote: Thanks Rich...Would it be possible for you to share some configuration details to achieve this for OpenLDAP version 2.3? To achieve what exactly for OpenLDAP 2.3? Chain from 389 to OpenLDAP? Cheers, A --- On *Mon, 10/12/09, Rich Megginson /<[email protected]>/* wrote: From: Rich Megginson <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [389-users] Read data immediately after write To: "General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project." <[email protected]> Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 10:47 AM Ankur Agarwal wrote: > Can i use chaining between master-slave without having different "ou"? > I mean if i have exactly same directory structure and same set of OUs > can i still have chaining between master and slave? > Yes. > > Cheers, > Ankur > > > --- On *Thu, 10/8/09, Michael Ströder /<[email protected] <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>>/* wrote: > > > From: Michael Ströder <[email protected] <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [389-users] Read data immediately after write > To: "General discussion list for the 389 Directory server > project." <[email protected] <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>> > Date: Thursday, October 8, 2009, 1:38 AM > > Ankur Agarwal wrote: > > > > I have a master-slave set-up with write operations always being > done to > > the master node. Now there is an issue where i need to read some > data > > immediately after write, and my read request goes to the slave. > It fails > > in cases when replication hasnt happened from master to slave before > > this read operation. > > You simply should not do that. Read from the master if you have to > rely on the > consistency of what you recently wrote to the master. > > > Is there a LDAP level configuration to handle this situation? > > Can chaining help in this case? > > No. (Except chaining the read requests of the writing client to > the master > which you don't want I guess). > > Ciao, Michael. > > -- > 389 users mailing list > [email protected] <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > 389 users mailing list > [email protected] <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users>-----Inline Attachment Follows----- -- 389 users mailing list [email protected] <http://us.mc589.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- 389 users mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users-- 389 users mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users-- 389 users mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- 389 users mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
