LDB_SCOPE_ONELEVEL without full traversal?

[tridge at samba.org]

Simo,

 > I don't have a specific windows use case yet, but I guess that on big
 > directories the difference will be evident.

It would only be evident if an application did a onelevel search
without any indexable expression on a part of the tree which isn't
itself the majority of the database anyway. I can't think of a non-GUI
application that does that.

 > The problem is: are one level searches really rare?

I can't think of any examples that would matter. If you say they
aren't rare, then you'll have to come up with at least one example :-)

 > Human speed may be slow, but humans comply more then machines when they
 > have to wait too much ;-)

yes, but ldb can do a full scan on a AD directory for a company with
10s of thousands of users in a about a second or so on my laptop. 

So our full scans are often faster than a normal ldap server does
indexed scans :-)

If ldb was being used for _really_ big databases (10s of millions of
records) then I'd agree. I'm just happy to leave that part of the
problem to the real ldap databases, and rely on the fact that we can
backend to a real ldap server.

My attitude to this might change, but right now I would like ldb to
conquer the "small, fast, light" space before it starts trying to get
into the complexity of big databases.

Cheers, Tridge