Hi,
We are on a process of merging datas from a remote database to a local
database. The two databases have the same base dn. To ease this process,
I thought for a way to make a union of the remote database and the local
database until remote datas are merged to local database. From my
readin
meta backend is one thing I found too when I were looking for some
solution and I thought I should also try. I had not yet the time to try
it but every where I saw his usage it is to map ou=suffix1 and
ou=suffix2 to "a third suffix".
In my case I have my local db with a suffix of dc=base,dc=dn
I used suffix massage to combine customer LDAP with my local LDAP server;
this allows us to have internal users. Documentation on doing this is very
sparse.
Client side; sssd points at dc=local.
# BDB database definitions
###
#
Le 2016-01-08 11:48, M. P. a écrit :
Hi,
We are on a process of merging datas from a remote database to a local
database. The two databases have the same base dn. To ease this
process, I thought for a way to make a union of the remote database
and the local database until remote datas are merged
M. P. wrote:
> Further testing let me say that entries
> that are present on the local server and not on the remote server, will not be
> displayed when searching the ldap server. When entries exists in both servers,
> the remote entries will be appended/overwrited by local entries before being
> d
Le 2016-01-11 13:37, Michael Ströder a écrit :
M. P. wrote:
Further testing let me say that entries
that are present on the local server and not on the remote server,
will not be
displayed when searching the ldap server. When entries exists in both
servers,
the remote entries will be appended/
Le 2016-01-11 12:52, M. P. a écrit :
Le 2016-01-08 11:48, M. P. a écrit :
Hi,
We are on a process of merging datas from a remote database to a local
database. The two databases have the same base dn. To ease this
process, I thought for a way to make a union of the remote database
and the local
