What if we change the syntax of PostalAddress, change the caseIgnoreListSubstringsMatch to something else for our particular installation? Can this solve the problem just for me? I know this is not standard but I must solve customer's problem in a timely fasion and unfortunately this is a big problem for my customer (they bought the LDAP system in order to search postalAddress!)
We should be able to first re-define postalAddress and wait for openldap to update their software (in the next revision) and change it back later then. I knew it is a better idea to separate postalAddress to st,l,street,roomNumber but the data before we implemented OpenLDAP mess them up in one field, for historical reasons. The customer used it this way for 8 years and don't wish to see a change, especially any change involve human work. Yet I don't know how fast is the next revision coming out. On Sat, 27 May 2006, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote: > [Zhang Weiwu] > > It is pertty strange that ldapsearch always return 0 results for > > postalAddress search like this: > > > > postalAddress=*a* > > [Dieter Kluenter] > > As far as I know, there are no rules for substring indexing of > > postalAddress values. > > Well, OpenLDAP does not seem to implement one yet, anyway. > > The LDAP standard says postalAddress uses caseIgnoreListSubstringsMatch, > which it does not define:-) The upcoming revision will add it. > > Mike Jackson] > > (varified there are a lot of entries with at least one 'a' in it) > > > > 1. you need to have a substring index for postalAddress > > No - an index is an optimization, not an enhancement. It can reduce the > number of entries the server must examine in detail during a search. > > So if an unindexed search returned success, an index can speed it up but > not make it find more entries. OTOH, if a search returned a search > limit failure, an index can help it succeed and return entries. > > > 2. substring indexes are generally only searchable by three characters > > minimum > > ...which means that the server cannot not use the index (if there was > one), so it must examine each entry in the searh scope. > > Anyway, to test if a particular filter can find a particular entry, > you can search that entry's DN with search scope "base". > > -- > Hallvard > > --- > You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE as > the SUBJECT of the message. --- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE as the SUBJECT of the message.
