IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
When using w2k3 linked attributes we are allowed to have multiple
values on a single valued attribute. This happens when the other
values are deleted.
Setting the RELAX control tell the ldb-tdb backend to not check for
this on replace, which means the caller has to check for single valued
violations.
It isn't very useful just saying that a control is not supported,
without saying which one is the problem
Pair-Programmed-With: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
- The outside API contains "DN" string arguments: Bad. Since in this way we
fully rely on the outside calls regarding the right DN format. Solution: Use
always a "struct ldb_dn" entry. Since this one is interchangeable and we can
handle it in our preferred way.
- DN comparison: The function doesn't seem that efficient. I "upgraded" it a bit
to be more powerful (added a second length check and do both before the string
comparison)
When we rename or modify a record, we need to update the indexes at
the same time. It is important that we use the DN of the actual
message that is stored in the database to do this, not the DN that was
passed in by the user. If the two differ in case then the index
records needs to use the 'real' record DN, as index handling is
currently case sensitive.
The ldb_dn_explode code normally enforces all special characters,
including a '=', must be escaped. Unfortunately this conflicts with
the ltdb index DNs, which for binary attributes may be base64
encoded. This allows a unescaped '=' as a special case for index DNs.
I think this is better since "ldb_backend_connect" and "ldb_connect" which
propagate those values should return only LDB constants. Therefore a conversion
(especially for "-1") would be needed.
Intuitively you would think it couldn't be longer than the minimum of
the two lists, but we are deliberately allowing for duplicates at this
level of the indexing code, which means the result can be longer
This gets rid of the @IDXPTR approach to in-transaction indexing,
instead using an in-memory tdb to hold index values during a
transaction. This also cleans up a lot of the internal indexing logic,
hopefully making it easier to understand.
One of the big changes is in memory management, with a lot more use
made of talloc tricks to avoid copying dn lists, and shortcuts used to
avoid high intersection and union calculation costs.
The overall result is that a re-provision on my laptop goes from 48s
to a bit over 10s.
When you try to add a 2nd value to a single valued attribute you get
LDB_ERR_ATTRIBUTE_OR_VALUE_EXISTS. w2k8-r2 join to s4 relies on this
error, doing a replace after it sees the error
