David Coutadeur wrote:
>
> Thank you Howard (and openldap core team) for this synthesis of the current
> and future state of dynamic membership devs.
>
> Indeed, some of my customers were suffering from dynlist performances, and
> the decision was taken to go back to more static features (like
Thank you Howard (and openldap core team) for this synthesis of the
current and future state of dynamic membership devs.
Indeed, some of my customers were suffering from dynlist performances,
and the decision was taken to go back to more static features (like
memberOf).
For now I did not
The recent work on expanding dynamic group functionality in the dynlist overlay
seems to have been
a bad idea. It makes an already fairly complex overlay even more complicated,
and it puts a lot more
work into the read side of operations, which adds up to quite noticeable
slowdowns in search per
