I was looking at adding support for ordered indexing for Integer attributes.
This would be an incompatible format change for index databases. In fact I'd
need to change the Presence index key as well, so it would affect all index
databases, not just those for Integer attributes.
Currently the
quote who=Howard Chu
Aaron Richton wrote:
Yes, on x86_64 Fedora 8.
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Gavin Henry wrote:
Anyone else getting this hanging on i386?
test050 extended to run with 3 slapd instances. Please test.
Fixed now in HEAD. I guess we need an ITS for this.
Will do one now.
--
Agreed that this would be a useful addition (I've run into/designed around
this a couple times). To answer is it a big deal that we lose binary
compat with RE23, I don't consider that a strong issue at all. We always
tell people to slapcat/slapadd as part of a release change, and this would
be
I wrote:
for larger absoulte values:
same, but for the sake of speed read the value as hex, so we only
need read the first digits (skipping initial zeros).
whoops, I meant only the first bytes of the value-as-hex will be
included in the index key.
--
Hallvard
quote who=Howard Chu
Aaron Richton wrote:
Agreed that this would be a useful addition (I've run into/designed
around
this a couple times). To answer is it a big deal that we lose binary
compat with RE23, I don't consider that a strong issue at all. We
always
tell people to slapcat/slapadd
Howard Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So far, 2.4 and 2.3 have totally identical database formats. Is it
worthwhile to break this compatibility to gain this feature, or better
to preserve compatibility and ignore this feature for now? Any thoughts
on going ahead with it here in RE24?
I say go
