On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote: > Guys, > > one thing that might not be clear in my previous mails : as Stefan pointed > out, what I'm talking about seemed to be relative to a multiple ldif files > layout, when we want to have one single ldif file to store all the config. > > My bad. > ah this is the reason exactly why I used the 'defeats purpose..', I understood that as multiple files which we didn't want to use
> In fact, I don't really care about the file system layout, whether it's a > single ldif file or a multiple ldif file : I *never* get the entries from > the disk, I'm always addressing the config partition to fetch them. yes, relying on config partition makes the location of config transparent and we can modify even a remote server configuration (by using a network connection based config partition on the client side) Kiran Ayyagari
