On 8/4/19 9:55 AM, Lutz Berger wrote:
Hello,
I've come across a web site
that claims that an "equality index" is only allowed for attributes
that have "EQUALITY" in their description, "otherwise terrible things
will happen".
For example
>> *attributeTypes: ( 1.3.6.1.4.1.13299.2.3.7.xxx NAME 'abCLZ'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
SINGLE-VALUE X-ORIGIN 'user defined' )**
*
For the sake of correctness, I've tried to build an equality-index for
an attribute missing such description, e.g.
*>> attributeTypes: ( 1.3.6.1.4.1.13299.2.3.7.xyz NAME 'abID' SYNTAX
1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 SINGLE-VALUE X-ORIGIN 'user defined' )*
So what is happening is that the first example has a "matching rule"
defined: EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch. If you define such an attribute
with this syntax you MUST have an equality index for that attribute.
Otherwise the server has to manually perform this matching - which is
VERY expensive. Hence why you see an etime of 26 seconds. Once its
indexed for equality the matching rule can efficiently be processed.
But you do not NEED to use this matching rule: EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch,
unless you have a requirement for it. But you should always index your
attribute for how you plan to use it. In this case you are doing an
equality search: <ATTR>=<some exact value> so you would want an
equality index (regardless of the presence of a matching rule).
HTH,
Mark
*Withour EQ-Index:*
[root@ur1 slapd-ur1devims]# fgrep "conn=34" access
[03/Aug/2019:14:21:00 +0200] conn=34 fd=65 slot=65 connection from
192.168.69.152 to 192.168.69.152
[03/Aug/2019:14:21:00 +0200] conn=34 op=0 BIND dn="cn=Directory
Manager" method=128 version=3
[03/Aug/2019:14:21:00 +0200] conn=34 op=0 RESULT err=0 tag=97
nentries=0 etime=0 dn="cn=directory manager"
[03/Aug/2019:14:21:00 +0200] conn=34 op=1 SRCH
base="ou=users,c=de,o=creditreform" scope=2
filter="(abID=777777777022544)" attrs=ALL
*[03/Aug/2019:14:21:26 +0200] conn=34 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=101
nentries=1 etime=26 notes=A*
[03/Aug/2019:14:21:26 +0200] conn=34 op=2 UNBIND
[03/Aug/2019:14:21:26 +0200] conn=34 op=2 fd=65 closed - U1
[root@ur1 slapd-ur1devims]#
*With EQ-Index:*
[root@ur1 slapd-ur1devims]# fgrep "conn=35" access
[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 fd=65 slot=65 connection from
192.168.69.152 to 192.168.69.152
[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 op=0 BIND dn="cn=Directory
Manager" method=128 version=3
[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 op=0 RESULT err=0 tag=97
nentries=0 etime=0 dn="cn=directory manager"
[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 op=1 SRCH
base="ou=users,c=de,o=creditreform" scope=2
filter="(abID=777777777022544)" attrs=ALL
*[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=101
nentries=1 etime=0*
[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 op=2 UNBIND
[03/Aug/2019:14:24:18 +0200] conn=35 op=2 fd=65 closed - U1
*My question is now, is the EQUALITY part of the schema description
really necessary**
**for building equality-indexes on attributes, since I couldn't
reproduce any**obvious
problem.*
From the access pattern I see in the access log, building such an index is
definitely beneficial in sense of performance.
Thanks for your efforts!
Best regards,
Lutz
--
Dipl.-Inform. Univ. Lutz Berger
Email: lutz.berger(a)multigrid.de
Multigrid-Logo <
http://multigrid.de/>
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproje...
--
389 Directory Server Development Team