[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH] 1095 apply updates in order

[Rob Crittenden]

Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> On 04/10/2013 08:02 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>>> The original design of the LDAP updater was to use numbered update files
>>> which would be applied in order in blocks of 10. We ended up just
>>> applying everything together, sorted by length of the DN.
>>
>> Why not just sort the files lexicographically, and _run_updates after
>> each one?
>
> That might work. I did this mostly for schema which can have
> interdependencies. I didn't want to force us to have humongous updates
> for schema.
>
>> I can kind of see the reasoning behind the blocks of ten, but it looks
>> pretty arbitrary and unnecessarily complex.
>> It will allow you to create/update parents and children anywhere in the
>> block of 10 and they'll be sorted properly, but outside of the blocks
>> you have to watch the ordering. This is pretty confusing; if it's really
>> needed it should at least be in the README.
>
> It is absolutely arbitrary.
>
> I'll beef up the README.
>
> In practice it probably isn't a big deal WHERE the updates get put, as
> long as schema is first. This is just an attempt to force us to be
> somewhat organized with things.
>
>>> This works ok except in the case of roles/privileges/permissions wehre
>>> it is possible that a role is added to a permission  before the role is
>>> created. So the permission has no memberOf attribute and things don't
>>> work as expected.
>>>
>>> So this patch implements the by-10 rule and applies the files 10-19,
>>> 20-29, etc. I left the ability to run unstructured updates too by
>>> default.
>>>
>>> We also need to revert this commit which breaks a test case now that
>>> roles/permissions are created properly,
>>> f7e27b547547be06f511a3ddfaff8db7d0b7898f
>>
>> \o/
>>
>>
>> In the README, 10 - 19 should be Schema & configuration.
>
> OK.
>
>> While you're at it you can update the FDS Server reference (FDS was
>> Fedora Directory Server, right?)
>>
>
> Yeah, shows how old this is. I'll fix it.

I updated the README with a bit more information. I dod not update the 
10-19 range because it really should just be schema. It isn't that way 
in the updates currently, but it is what we should strive for.

These are not hard and fast rules, with the exception of schema really, 
just a recommendation for organization. I can go ahead and move some 
files around if you really want, but I think it's just shuffling deck 
chairs.

rob

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: freeipa-rcrit-1095-2-update.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 6734 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20130411/1c17226f/attachment.bin>