I would get the Database Format and Configuration out of the equation.
It's
up to us to provide tools to migrate from one format to the other. Don't
get
me wrong : when I say that configuration is out of the equation, I mean
that
the configuration can change, not its format (ie switching
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Stefan Seelmann seelm...@apache.orgwrote:
I would get the Database Format and Configuration out of the equation.
It's
up to us to provide tools to migrate from one format to the other.
Don't
get
me wrong : when I say that configuration is out of the
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1/6/11 2:36 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
Hi all,
Excuse the cross post but this also has significance to the API list.
Problem
For our benefit and the benefit of our users we need to be uber careful
On 1/6/11 2:15 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Stefan Seelmannseelm...@apache.orgwrote:
I would get the Database Format and Configuration out of the equation.
It's
up to us to provide tools to migrate from one format to the other.
Don't
get
me wrong : when I say
Hi,
while working on the AP handling, I faced some issue today with the
search operation. The problem is that when we get back an entry from the
backend, we filter it to add or remove some attributes, and to accept or
not the entry. Usually, the following filters are executed :
1)
Hi,
today, while tracking some issue in the server, I jumped into some code
in the ExceptionInterceptor that I find questionable. Let me explain
something we already discussed on IRC.
When we do a search, we go through the chain of interceptors, down to
the backend. In the backend, we
Hi guys,
I inverted the two interceptors in trunk (not committed yet), and ran
the tests : no problem at all.
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 6, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 1/6/11 2:15 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Stefan
Seelmannseelm...@apache.orgwrote:
I would get the Database Format and Configuration out of the
equation.
It's
Why not just inject the filter where you like by index into the filter
list - no need to move around interceptor order. If there is no add
with index position let's expose it. WDYT?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 6, 2011, at 6:10 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
while
OK no problem but still though we should be able to inject a filter into the
filter list anywhere we like. That way we will not get stuck trying to
compromise interceptor position to impact where the filter goes.
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
SNIP ...
On 1/6/11 2:58 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
This is not to blame anyone. I am pointing out the problem, and pointing
out
a solution to it so we're not screwed by it. The web of dependencies in
shared will
Hi,
following my previous mail, I have a bit more insight about the problem.
When we do a search, we not only give a base DN, but also a filter and a
scope. Now, there are a few possibilities :
1) We have entries under the base DN, accepted by the filter and the scope
2) We have entries under
On 1/6/11 6:48 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
Why not just inject the filter where you like by index into the filter
list - no need to move around interceptor order. If there is no add
with index position let's expose it. WDYT?
It would be more complicated. Inverting the interceptor is way simpler
On 1/6/11 7:02 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Emmanuel Lecharnyelecha...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
today, while tracking some issue in the server, I jumped into some code in
the ExceptionInterceptor that I find questionable. Let me explain something
we already discussed on
On 1/6/11 7:03 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
OK no problem but still though we should be able to inject a filter into the
filter list anywhere we like. That way we will not get stuck trying to
compromise interceptor position to impact where the filter goes.
Yeah, probably. But we usually do
Provide a tool to easily add common schemas to an installation
--
Key: DIRSERVER-1593
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1593
Project: Directory ApacheDS
Issue
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
following my previous mail, I have a bit more insight about the problem.
When we do a search, we not only give a base DN, but also a filter and a
scope. Now, there are a few possibilities :
1) We have entries
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
following my previous mail, I have a bit more insight about the problem.
When we do a search, we not only give a base DN, but also a filter and a
scope. Now, there are a few possibilities :
1) We have entries
Avoid extra lookup in ExceptionInterceptor.search()
---
Key: DIRSERVER-1594
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1594
Project: Directory ApacheDS
Issue Type: Improvement
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Stefan Seelmann seelm...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
following my previous mail, I have a bit more insight about the problem.
When we do a search, we not only give a base DN, but also a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-1594?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Stefan Seelmann updated DIRSERVER-1594:
---
Attachment: DIRSERVER-1594.patch
The proposed patch removes the overridden
On 1/6/11 9:58 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Emmanuel Lécharnyelecha...@apache.orgwrote:
On 1/6/11 7:03 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
OK no problem but still though we should be able to inject a filter into
the
filter list anywhere we like. That way we will not get
22 matches
Mail list logo
