Am 2007-07-09 14:03:06, schrieb Roberto C. Sánchez: > Without getting into the reasons why MySQL specifically sucks, a > directory is generally more suited to something like that than a > database. With LDAP, you can split your directory if necessary and have > a forest of servers. So, if you have a company with three branch > offices, you can have each branch office serve a directory of its > "local" users and then have a master LDAP server which knows which > subordinate servers are out there.
???
We (at the french army) have several 100 Offices and
"libpam-pgsql" plus "libnss-pgsql" is working perfectly.
All what you tell us about LDAP can be done in PostgreSQL too.
And our (and my private) PostgreSQL can much more then LDAP.
> Additionally, replication using slurpd is very nice. I know that MySQL
> and PostgreSQL both support replication, however the real advantage that
> LDAP gives is that it is specifically optimized for few writes and
> *many* reads (which is what an authentication store will need to do).
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature
