Hi, As far as I'm aware listAll being passed to LDAPConfigCmd only returns the LDAP configuration stored within the cloudstack database, not user accounts so it shouldn't affect it.
I am looking at adding an LDAPUserListCmd with my GSoC project(Ldap user provisioning) in order to enable AJAX calls from the UI for auto completion of forms, but this would be done via filters. On 13 June 2013 22:57, Musayev, Ilya <imusa...@webmd.net> wrote: > Ian, > > Hope all is well, > > Please consider a case when you get a very large userbase - i.e. what would > happen when you have 1000+ users in ldap/active directory? > > In past I've seen other products crash because the logic could not handle a > where large user base. > > Regards > ilya > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ian Duffy [mailto:nore...@reviews.apache.org] On Behalf Of Ian Duffy >> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:16 AM >> To: cloudstack; Ian Duffy >> Subject: Review Request: Change getListAll() within the LDAPConfigCmd.java >> file to return a boolean instead of a string. >> >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------- >> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: >> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11863/ >> ----------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Review request for cloudstack. >> >> >> Summary (updated) >> ----------------- >> >> Change getListAll() within the LDAPConfigCmd.java file to return a boolean >> instead of a string. >> >> >> Description (updated) >> ------- >> >> Change getListAll() within the LDAPConfigCmd.java file to return a boolean >> instead of a string. It was only being used as true or false and didn't make >> sense to have it as a string. >> >> Fixed a slight typo on the exception thrown when no hostname, searchbase >> or queryfilter is given. >> >> >> Diffs (updated) >> ----- >> >> >> api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/ldap/LDAPConfigCmd.j >> ava 2976de4 >> >> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11863/diff/ >> >> >> Testing (updated) >> ------- >> >> Built it and confirmed the command still worked as expected. >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ian Duffy >
