Yes I understand. If you would like to implement this bypass capability based on the target DN then feel free to submit a patch.
Thanks, Alex On 10/3/07, Matt Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > I'm trying to write a custom partition that will be used as context > partition, but I'd like to continue to use the Btree/Jdbm partition > implementation for the system configuration partition. > > With a little trial and error (mostly errors), I've found out that several > methods in the JdbmPartition (used by the system configuration partition > partition) will not work unless preceeded by a corresponding "fix-ups" > provided by the interceptors. For example, calls to to the methods in > org.apache.directory.server.core.normalization.NormalizationService must > be made, or BindDNs can not be resolved. Unfortunately, MyCustomPartition, > doesn't like the way that LdapDNs, attributes and filters are normalized by > org.apache.directory.server.core.normalization.NormalizationService. > > In other words, there appears to be more than at least one situation > where a correlation between interceptors and partitions is necessary, but > what we have (at least in Apache DS 1.0.x) is a design where all > interceptors in the chain are called regardles of the partition that will > eventually be invoked. To configure per-partition interception. > > Perhaps what I'm looking for is a way that I can insert my interceptor > first in the chain and then optionally skip other interceptors if I > encounter a DN or base that I know will invoke my partition? According to > documentation for ApacheDS 1.0.x ( > http://directory.apache.org/apacheds/1.0/interceptors.html) the Nexus is > called by a "special interceptor" at the end of the chain. Therefore, it > seems very difficult to skip interceptors in the chain without also > elimintating the call to PartitionNexus ... > > I suppose my real question is why ApacheDS wasn't designed so that > interceptors could (optionally) be configured for association only with a > certain suffix or partition. This would allow the configuration flexibility > that I would need -- to use both the JdbmPartition and my own > customPartition without having to undo all of the normalization, schema, > referral (,etc) stuff in my own customPartition that I didn't want done in > the first place... > > Does this make any sense? > > -- > Matt > > > >
