ldb for 3.0.24?

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

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

Volker Lendecke schrieb:
> BTW, on irc metze told me that it is better to wait until
> 3.0.25 to include ldb. Stefan, do you have any further input
> on this? Should I pull ldb from the 3.0.24 branch and
> re-install the old group mapping code?

Hi Volker,

it mostly depends on when 3.0.24 will be released.

The problems I see are:

We use hardcoded attribute_name to attribute_handler mappings.
The problem with it is that if we change them in the code,
the records for indexes are created under different DN's
if the attribute handler changes. We hit this problem in samba4
last week, we're the attribute handler for the 'member' attribute
was changed to use the ldb_canonicalise_dn() function instead of
ldb_default_copy(), the result was that the index record
for the member attribute changed from:
  "DN=@INDEX:MEMBER:CN=Administrator,CN=Users,DC=sernoxdom4,DC=mx,DC=base"
to
"DN=@INDEX:MEMBER:CN=ADMINISTRATOR,CN=USERS,DC=SERNOXDOM4,DC=MX,DC=BASE"

And the ldb searches to find the group memberships of the
administrator account, didn't detect the administrator is member of
the administrators group, so the the kludge_acl module deniesd the
write access to the administrator.

In the end fixing the problem was easy, just remove the attributes of
the @INDEXLIST object and readd them, in other words the indexes are
regenerated.

But I think we need to fix this! I think we should just have attribute
syntaxes hardcoded in the code, and have the attribute_name ->
attribute_syntax mappings in the @ATTRIBUTES object only,
so that it doesn't depend on the version of ldbtools which are used if
you can access the ldb file correctly.

And I think if we ship the current code with samba3, it will may hit
a lot of people as the group_mapping.ldb uses indexed records.

And in the current implementation the LOCAL-DBSPEED test says that
tdb is 10 times faster than ldb.

So I think that it would be good to wait untill the problems in ldb
are fixed and will not cause problems to people, when they install a
newer samba version. Also we should try to make the LOCAL-DBSPEED
faster for the ldb case.

So depending on when 3.0.24 will come, it would be better to wait with
it for 3.0.25.

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

iD8DBQFFbXt1m70gjA5TCD8RAnX9AKCyf/hCOYJc8//xkf9exGQG9v4vwACfbEWx
HGRTsX1ZDW9YuJ/zRaPNyZw=
=mLii
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----