directory-fortress mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yudhi Karunia Surtan <brainmaster...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Replacing Caching with LDAP Persistent Searches
Date Wed, 20 Mar 2019 01:57:24 GMT
Hi Emanuel,

Sorry i don't get it. Do you mean LDAP have their own internal cache?
Yes, I agree. In most of use case once the permissions are set, it is very
rare to change.

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019, 23:35 Emmanuel L├ęcharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On 19/03/2019 14:45, Yudhi Karunia Surtan wrote:
> > Hi Shawn,
> >
> > Is that possible that by design we put the optional cache interface at
> > fortress so later people can choose their own cache implementations? Well
> > ya, by default it will use LDAP if they not implement their own class
> > implementation.
> >
> > I think caching is very important when you have a lot user using it.
>
>
> Using persistent search is a better solution : you keep a local cache
> which get informed live when some changes are made on the LDAP server.
>
> Most of the time, you just have to read the cache.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message