LDB_SCOPE_ONELEVEL without full traversal?

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

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

Volker Lendecke schrieb:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 10:18:25AM +0100, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>> But the problem is that it would take a view weeks or months to
>> implement, because we need to make sure that it will be fast as the
>> current ldb_tdb for the indexed searches.
> 
> As an intermediate solution for my direct problem, I think
> Simo's idea of a parentDN is quite smart. I can certainly
> code that above ldb, but this would subvert the idea of ldb
> a bit. Coding it inside ldb might become an upgrade issue.
> 
> What do you think?

So you want to handle this in your registry code, by adding
a 'parentDN' to the subobjects and then doing a search like this:

basedn="" (parentDN=CN=container) scope=sub

instead of

basedn="CN=Container" (objectClass=*) scope=one

if so then I think it's fine:-)

metze
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFdpz6m70gjA5TCD8RAv00AKCCgJ1t9M2SCq5Y7SgjKq9vZP93pgCfWpCf
6EOE2QmxRFexIKeHtLcBPjo=
=AQi8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----