Hi John,

these fields support auto-completion. This is also what I wanted to
check. I think this should be no problem to fix for the final 4.7 release.


Best regards

Roland



On 19.09.2014 16:37, John Maher wrote:
> Fields that result in LAM timing out include the following:
> 
> Department
> Employee type
> 
> Oddly enough, the field Job title has a slight impact on performance,
> but does not result in a time out being reached.
> 
> What LDAP attributes are these fields associated with?
> 
> By the way, I did not test all fields, because I don't need all of the
> fields, but I do know that the following fields do not have an impact
> on performance:
> 
> Description
> Telephone number
> Home telephone number
> Mobile number
> Employee number
> Location
> Email address
> 
> John
> 
> 
> On 09/19/2014 10:22 AM, John Maher wrote:
>> Roland, I discovered something very interesting. If I edited the 
>> server profile by checking all of the boxes under "Personal" in
>> order to hide all of those fields. LAM then worked perfectly well.
> 
>> So I started selectively unhiding various fields. (I need some of 
>> those fields to be visible). I discovered that certain fields
>> (e.g., Department), when unchecked, would lock up apache and result
>> in LAM timing out, rendering no fields at all after the 30
>> seconds.
> 
>> For example, if I hid all fields except Department, LAM timed out.
>> But if I hid Department and unhid Description, Telephone number,
>> Employee number, Location, and Email address, LAM worked fine.
> 
>> I'm in the process of determining other fields that have the same 
>> effect as Department and will let you know what I find.
> 
>> John
> 
>> On 09/17/2014 09:23 AM, John Maher wrote:
> 
> 
>>> On 09/16/2014 12:05 PM, Roland Gruber wrote:
>>>> Hi John,
> 
>>>> I tried with 10000 users and there was no problem. But maybe
>>>> it is related to auto-completion. Please give me some more days
>>>> to test this.
> 
>>> Absolutely. Thanks, Roland. The system I'm setting up will be 
>>> production, but is currently in a testing phase, so I could 
>>> experiment liberally if you have suggestions.
> 
>>> John
> 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>>>
> 
>> Want excitement?
>>> Manually upgrade your production database. When you want 
>>> reliability, choose Perforce Perforce version control.
>>> Predictably reliable. 
>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> 
>>>
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lam-public mailing list [email protected] 
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Slashdot TV.  Video for Nerds.  Stuff that Matters.
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
>> Lam-public mailing list [email protected] 
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Slashdot TV.  Video for Nerds.  Stuff that Matters.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Lam-public mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.  Video for Nerds.  Stuff that Matters.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Lam-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lam-public

Reply via email to