Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Directory (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-directory/)
-   -   Master index (?!) feature request? (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-directory/663047-master-index-feature-request.html)

Diego Woitasen 05-04-2012 01:44 PM

Master index (?!) feature request?
 
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/04/2012 06:47 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:
>>
>> I didn't know how to title this mail. I think this should be a feature
>> request in Track when I want to discuss this here first.
>>
>> I have 389DS with 150 DBs with an structure similar to this:
>>
>> dc=company,dc=com
>> ou=Headquarters,dc=company,dc=com
>> ou=Branch1,dc=company,dc=com
>> ou=Branch2,dc=company,dc=com
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> ou=Branch150,dc=company,dc=com
>>
>> Each one of this subtrees are in separate DBs because I have subtree
>> replication between the 150 branches of the companies.
>>
>> 80% of the objects are in the ou=HeadQuarters. I've noticed that the
>> performance is definetely better when I use base ou=Headquarters in my
>> applications.
>>
>> I have indexes on each DB but I think that the problem is that 389DS
>> doesn't have a master index or something to improve the searchs in
>> scenarios like mine.
>
>
> Can you explain more about what you mean by "master index"?

An index that includes all the DBs. May be "global index" is a better
name. Right now, when you search for something, 389DS queries all the
DBs, one by one and with 150 DBs is a problem. There should be a way
to avoid that.


>
>
>>
>> May be the solution is to implemen another replication code that
>> doesn't required separate DBs for subtree replication.
>>
>> Shall I file a ticket? Or there is a solution now?
>>
>> Regards,
>> *Diego
>>
>



--
Diego Woitasen
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Rich Megginson 05-04-2012 02:15 PM

Master index (?!) feature request?
 
On 05/04/2012 07:44 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:

On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote:

On 05/04/2012 06:47 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:

I didn't know how to title this mail. I think this should be a feature
request in Track when I want to discuss this here first.

I have 389DS with 150 DBs with an structure similar to this:

dc=company,dc=com
ou=Headquarters,dc=company,dc=com
ou=Branch1,dc=company,dc=com
ou=Branch2,dc=company,dc=com
.
.
.
ou=Branch150,dc=company,dc=com

Each one of this subtrees are in separate DBs because I have subtree
replication between the 150 branches of the companies.

80% of the objects are in the ou=HeadQuarters. I've noticed that the
performance is definetely better when I use base ou=Headquarters in my
applications.

I have indexes on each DB but I think that the problem is that 389DS
doesn't have a master index or something to improve the searchs in
scenarios like mine.


Can you explain more about what you mean by "master index"?

An index that includes all the DBs. May be "global index" is a better
name. Right now, when you search for something, 389DS queries all the
DBs, one by one and with 150 DBs is a problem. There should be a way
to avoid that.


Ok, I see. Yes, might be useful too for doing simple paged searches,
server side sorting, vlv, etc. across multiple databases.








May be the solution is to implemen another replication code that
doesn't required separate DBs for subtree replication.

Shall I file a ticket? Or there is a solution now?

Regards,
Diego






--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Mark Reynolds 05-04-2012 06:57 PM

Master index (?!) feature request?
 
Deigo,

In the meantime, you should get a performance boost if your top "tree"
suffix(dc=company,dc=com) has the same attributes indexed as all the
other sub-suffixes(db's). Even if the db is empty, this will still help
when you search on the top node.


Mark

On 05/04/2012 10:15 AM, Rich Megginson wrote:

On 05/04/2012 07:44 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com>
wrote:

On 05/04/2012 06:47 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:

I didn't know how to title this mail. I think this should be a feature
request in Track when I want to discuss this here first.

I have 389DS with 150 DBs with an structure similar to this:

dc=company,dc=com
ou=Headquarters,dc=company,dc=com
ou=Branch1,dc=company,dc=com
ou=Branch2,dc=company,dc=com
.
.
.
ou=Branch150,dc=company,dc=com

Each one of this subtrees are in separate DBs because I have subtree
replication between the 150 branches of the companies.

80% of the objects are in the ou=HeadQuarters. I've noticed that the
performance is definetely better when I use base ou=Headquarters in my
applications.

I have indexes on each DB but I think that the problem is that 389DS
doesn't have a master index or something to improve the searchs in
scenarios like mine.


Can you explain more about what you mean by "master index"?

An index that includes all the DBs. May be "global index" is a better
name. Right now, when you search for something, 389DS queries all the
DBs, one by one and with 150 DBs is a problem. There should be a way
to avoid that.


Ok, I see. Yes, might be useful too for doing simple paged searches,
server side sorting, vlv, etc. across multiple databases.








May be the solution is to implemen another replication code that
doesn't required separate DBs for subtree replication.

Shall I file a ticket? Or there is a solution now?

Regards,
Diego






--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Diego Woitasen 05-04-2012 07:04 PM

Master index (?!) feature request?
 
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Mark Reynolds <mareynol@redhat.com> wrote:
> Deigo,
>
> In the meantime, you should get a performance boost if your top "tree"
> suffix(dc=company,dc=com) has the same attributes indexed as all the other
> sub-suffixes(db's). *Even if the db is empty, this will still help when you
> search on the top node.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 05/04/2012 10:15 AM, Rich Megginson wrote:
>>
>> On 05/04/2012 07:44 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Rich Megginson<rmeggins@redhat.com>
>>> *wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 05/04/2012 06:47 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't know how to title this mail. I think this should be a feature
>>>>> request in Track when I want to discuss this here first.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have 389DS with 150 DBs with an structure similar to this:
>>>>>
>>>>> dc=company,dc=com
>>>>> ou=Headquarters,dc=company,dc=com
>>>>> ou=Branch1,dc=company,dc=com
>>>>> ou=Branch2,dc=company,dc=com
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>> .
>>>>> ou=Branch150,dc=company,dc=com
>>>>>
>>>>> Each one of this subtrees are in separate DBs because I have subtree
>>>>> replication between the 150 branches of the companies.
>>>>>
>>>>> 80% of the objects are in the ou=HeadQuarters. I've noticed that the
>>>>> performance is definetely better when I use base ou=Headquarters in my
>>>>> applications.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have indexes on each DB but I think that the problem is that 389DS
>>>>> doesn't have a master index or something to improve the searchs in
>>>>> scenarios like mine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can you explain more about what you mean by "master index"?
>>>
>>> An index that includes all the DBs. May be "global index" is a better
>>> name. Right now, when you search for something, 389DS queries all the
>>> DBs, one by one and with 150 DBs is a problem. There should be a way
>>> to avoid that.
>>
>>
>> Ok, I see. *Yes, might be useful too for doing simple paged searches,
>> server side sorting, vlv, etc. across multiple databases.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> May be the solution is to implemen another replication code that
>>>>> doesn't required separate DBs for subtree replication.
>>>>>
>>>>> Shall I file a ticket? Or there is a solution now?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> *Diego
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

I've filed a ticket https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/357

--
Diego Woitasen
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:40 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.