ldb API?

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Volker Lendecke schrieb:
| Hi, Samba4 developers!
|
| How much of the ldb API is set in stone?
|
| Half a year ago I did some work to get rid of the RFC API, and in samba4 the
| ldb API re-invents exactly the same API in a less functional varient. For
| example currently you can't get paged results through that API (my current
| favourite, but this should only display the point).
|
| libcli/ldap/ outlines a "new" api, based on structures. Would you be willing to
| convert the existing code to that kind of API? This would essentially mean to
| re-implement much of ldb_tdb.c and the modules stuff. This API gives us the
| full LDAP semantics while already being talloc based. Sooner or later (I
| suspect rather soon...) we need more of the LDAP semantics than the current ldb
| API provides anyway.
|
| I might start looking at that, but this is not worth the effort if Samba4 can't
| settle on that API.

Hi Volker,

I think that changing the ldb API (or add another alternative api) woould be a good idea!
See my commit message of revision 4096 that is what we also need for our directory service database
And I think it would very good to support main key features directly in ldb (without modules)
because, otherwise it's much more complicated to implement this features. I think it's a bit like
when you want to implement NTVFS features in the samba3 VFS subsystem...

But maybe it's better to when we would discuss this next week, when I'm back from holidays:-)

- --
metze

Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org> www.samba.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBz7LGm70gjA5TCD8RAugWAJ0fJf3TMs+nJsqsgDUX1gnRxM0tEQCfcMlL
kCGrI3kE8d5r3Ccxlt99NtU=
=GOsp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----