ldb for 3.0.24?

[Gerald (Jerry) Carter]

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

Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> 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"

gahhh!!!  I'm know I'm going to get flamed for this but *this*
kind of issue was exactly stability I voiced concerned over.

> 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.
>

ok.  Based on that I'm going to pull ldb from 3.0.24.  We can
leave it in SAMBA_3_0 for now, but if necessary, I'll pull
it from there and go back to using Volker's original multi-index
tdb patch.







cheers, jerry
=====================================================================
Samba                                    ------- http://www.samba.org
Centeris                         -----------  http://www.centeris.com
"What man is a man who does not make the world better?"      --Balian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFbatJIR7qMdg1EfYRAtNoAJkBR0Qb1kwJC+eVZQOJoDSX6LPWvwCghhYc
usysCgjqSxsUlxfFwU/K+Mo=
=o2uJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----