On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Stefan Seelmann <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> > wrote: >> So I'm continuing playing with many concepts, and having some kind of fun >> with the new configuration system. However, that raises some interesting >> questions. > >> 2) Relations between component and storage >> If we consider a LdpaServer, the following relations are obvious : >> LdapServer >> -> DirectoryService >> -> Partitions >> -> Indexes >> -> Journal >> -> ChangeLog >> -> Transports >> -> Replication consumer >> -> Transport >> -> Replication provider >> -> Transport > > I wonder if another hierarchy (DIT structure) makes more sense: > > DirectoryService > -> Partitions > -> Indexes > -> Journal > -> Changelog > -> Servers > -> LdapServer > -> Transports > -> Replication consumer > -> Replication provider > -> KerberosServer > -> ... > > This way it should also be possible to define multiple directory > services with their own servers. +1 sounds perfect, might solve many linking issues
Kiran Ayyagari
