ldb: Extended LDB requests under transaction

[Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer]

But are you favourable for a little clean-up patch for the 
"ldb_extended" call: 
http://gitweb.samba.org/samba.git/?p=mdw/samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=85e8dab6fa746d8774306c3dae72d533881b26d2

1.) to have a location debug output
2.) to have invalid ldb_results ("res") free'd

Thanks,
Matthias

simo wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 07:03 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 15:23 +0200, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
>>> Hi LDB developers,
>>>
>>> currently LDB does not require transactions when an extended operation
>>> is launched. A long term goal from my side is to provide the extended
>>> password change mechanism:
>>> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5611. Hence I'm worrying if
>>> we need to apply transactions also on this type of request - my patch
>>> proposal:
>>> http://gitweb.samba.org/samba.git/?p=mdw/samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=45bd4197168b4a6642e33386d21d9168ebf8f7f9.
>>> What do you think?
>> Other extended operations include Start-TLS, so it's not clear that by
>> definition, all extended operations need to be covered by transactions.
>> The module that implements such an extended operation may wish to start
>> it's own transaction, but I don't think we can do so globally.
> I agree, unless there is a clear, provable need for a transaction in all
> case we shouldn't start one.
>
> Simo.
>