[Beowulf] Poll - Directory implementation

Ryan Novosielski novosirj at rutgers.edu
Wed Oct 24 10:34:18 PDT 2018

Hash: SHA1

On 10/24/2018 01:30 PM, Ryan Novosielski wrote:
> On 10/24/2018 01:13 PM, Michael Di Domenico wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:04 PM Ryan Novosielski 
>> <novosirj at rutgers.edu> wrote:
>>> Funny, we are considering the exact opposite, and this is our 
>>> motivation:
>>> https://access.redhat.com/solutions/2440481
>> we're contemplating the same, but we're okay with switching back 
>> to the openldap source.  in my opinion redhat deprecating
>> openldap is just a money grab to push people towards rhds
> I don't have an alternate theory, but 389-ds is free, and I guess
> I imagined "comparable." I suppose if it's not as capable as
> OpenLDAP and RHDS is, that would make sense. But maybe they just
> want to push people toward something where there's an easy path?
> People saying that 389-ds is slow is not encouraging, given that
> we're currently attempting to tune OpenLDAP to be less slow.

WHOOPS! This is a lot nastier on second read (though not supported, it
is /provided/):

The 389-ds packages provide the core directory services components for
Identity Management (IdM) in Red Hat Enterprise Linux and the Red Hat
Directory Server (RHDS). The package is not supported as a stand-alone
solution to provide LDAP services.

More information can be found here:
The supported usage of 389-ds and 389-ds-base packages in Identity
Management in RHEL and RH Directory Server"

- -- 
 || \\UTGERS,     |----------------------*O*------------------------
 ||_// the State  |    Ryan Novosielski - novosirj at rutgers.edu
 || \\ University | Sr. Technologist - 973/972.0922 ~*~ RBHS Campus
 ||  \\    of NJ  | Office of Advanced Res. Comp. - MSB C630, Newark


More information about the Beowulf mailing list