Also at some point we may include two sets of operation parameters. One set is the original set of parameters for the operation without any alterations taking place such as those with normalization or other optimizations. Another set will be the same parameters tweaked by the system which should be applied by partitions.
These are considerations for our bigbang branch which is refactoring the 1.5line for a 2.0 release. I think by providing the original request objects in the operation context as well as the modified versions of them your problem will probably go away. Still though feel welcome to follow this activity to make sure your needs are met as we change the server's architecture. Any recommendation or involvement would be highly appreciated. Alex On 10/4/07, Matt Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok. I will. Thanks. > > On 10/3/07, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 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.NormalizationServicemust > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
