Wow! Thx. for the feedback Brett, all v. good points indeed ... I'm gonna
hazard a guess that your response is larger than my solution and probably
took longer to write ;-)
PS - That's meant to be sarcasm :)
re: your question -
This massages the data into something the shell will more reliably handle
which will almost certainly reduce the accuracy ... but it's that or
a.n.other script handler. Shell script is legacy and limited ... both of
which contribute to the reason I still use it; legacy = widely available /
limited = everything's a bloody challenge and, therefore, kinda interesting
in a sick way -
set UNIQUEVALUE=!LINE:~0,80!
* trim the line to the first 80 chars (shell has intermittent issues
past that)
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE:%ATTRIBUTE%: =!
* reliably remove the LDIF attribute display name prefix
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE:\=-!
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE:/=-!
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE::=-!
* filesystem doesn't like colons, back or forward slashes, so we
have to replace them with an acceptable char.
--
Dean Wells
MSEtechnology
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://msetechnology.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Shirley
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] GroupBy type queries in LDAP
Basically sorting it by using the NTFS B-Tree for file names as your
indexing method ... very cunning! As hackerly as this solution is, it has
some cons ...
1 - Requires disk space to store such information.
2 - It will churn the disk a bunch, dumping all the DNs+Attribute1 to a
file. Then sorting them into a whole bunch of files. I.e. you may
become disk bounded on the client you're running this from.
3 - BTW, if your Attribute1's values have a tendency towards similar
prefixes, ensure you 8.3 naming off on that volume, or slowness.
It may sound like I'm attacking, I'm not, just weighing options ..
My Solution:
If Attribute1 is indexed, there is a better way ... we have this control, it
says to the server, hey I'd like the entries back in sorted order, based on
this attribute.
- See winldap.h in SDK, and see LDAP_SERVER_SORT_OID for details on it.
Then one could loop and print the current and previous iterations DNs if the
previous iteration's Attribute1 value equaled the current Attribute1 value
...
This is nice, it requires no intermediate storage, couldn't really become
throttled on client disk subsystem, uses server side DB index, ...
Aside:
One could also of course implement cunning aggregate / count
functionality as well, for attribute's that may have similar
values, like "title".
Though w/ Deans method it'd be easier, b/c you could do "wc *"
in the TEMPDIR. More sexyness w/ Dean's solution.
More perf thoughts:
Though, my intuition says, your solution will still be faster in some
situations, if running on a seperate client machine (i.e. not running on the
DC), and the DIT doesn't fit in memory. Also yours is already coded, a big
plus for most people. Basically in any case where in order traversal of the
DIT is faster than index based walk, will end up being faster for your
method.
Also mine will just plain break I think if Attribute1 isn't indexed. In
fact I think the server just returns the objects not in the order you
requested, but maybe I'm wrong, and it does the right thing and returns an
error.
Sorry, joe, if that is sort of throwing fishing pole and line to someone in
the desert sounding, but Dean has definately seen water / LDAP.
Everyone forgets (or doesn't know of) the sort control, so I thought I'd
give it some "air time" ... if only I had a blog to mention this kind of
thing.
Cheers,
-BrettSh [msft]
Posting "AS IS" ... no rights are confired ...
P.S. - I didn't understand all of the .cmd file, FYI, Dean, people are
supposed to move to bash or perl before they get this good at .cmd. You may
not have gotten the memo. (from the love) So for my own edification, what
exactly are these lines doing:
set UNIQUEVALUE=!LINE:~0,80!
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE:%ATTRIBUTE%: =!
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE:\=-!
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE:/=-!
set UNIQUEVALUE=!UNIQUEVALUE::=-!
-----Original Message-----
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:01:51 -0400
From: joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: 'Send - AD mailing list' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] GroupBy type queries in LDAP
Very cute.
Your batch files scare the crap out of me. :o)
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Wells
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 6:18 PM
To: Send - AD mailing list
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] GroupBy type queries in LDAP
Since a solution hasn't manifested itself to date, I got intrigued and tried
to put this together in a simple and relatively fast shell script ... which
I've enclosed as a text file (if memory serves I am able to enclose small
text files).
The script requires two args; a QUOTED "DN" and the LDAP name of the
attribute to look at.
Hope this serves your purpose, if not, I'm certain it will serve me at some
point in the future :)
Dean
--
Dean Wells
MSEtechnology
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://msetechnology.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeremy Palenchar
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 5:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ActiveDir] GroupBy type queries in LDAP
OK, LDAP evangelists,
I need to query our customer-facing AD for a list of all the users who share
a particular attribute. Let's call that attribute "Attribute1."
So, if two people have the same value in Attribute1, I need their DN.
The trick is, that I want the results for all possible values of Attribute1.
In SQL, I would use group by Attribute1 having count(Attribute1) >1 to get a
list of all Attribute1 values where more than one object had the same value.
I would then join that back to the table to get a list of all the DN's with
those values of Attribute1.
Is there a way to do this with an LDAP query.
Please note that the directory contains millions of objects and iterating
through them will be painful.
-Jeremy
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
