Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 20.12.2016 um 08:09 in Nachricht <5858D90F.7AD : > >>> 161 : 60728>: > >>>> "Bannister, Mark" <[email protected]> schrieb am > >>>> 19.12.2016 um > > 16:43 in Nachricht > > > > [...] > > > Agreed. LDAP doesn't have a swap operation. There's a shame. > > [...] > > > > More generally LDAP has no transactions for updates. I wonder if a > > transaction mechanism could be implemented using LDAP extensions. > > Occassionally for some mass-update I'd prefer the whole update to fail > > if a few operations failed. Currently you'll have to fix each failing > > operation separately... > > And of course it would be cool if LDIF could be extended to be able to > bracket changes with transactions, > so automation could be made easier, maybe even breaking mass updates into > managable chunks...
I'm sure that would be a difficult change to make. I tried putting in something close to this in the PROSE Programming Language, which is a language extension on top of an LDAP data model. I provided a way of guaranteeing atomicity when there are multiple add, modify or delete operations to perform on a single object, so that if any single in the list failed then none of the changes are left applied, and I also invented the concept of an "object edit buffer" where you could group together adds, mods and deletes in a single transaction which you commit in a single step. However, this is internal to the language and does not extend to LDAP nor LDIF, was very difficult to implement in a consistent manner, does not encompass changes to multiple objects and has no solution at all that will work with virtual attributes. In summary, what you ask is very hard to do well. Mark. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: Morgan Stanley is not acting as a municipal advisor and the opinions or views contained herein are not intended to be, and do not constitute, advice within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. If you have received this communication in error, please destroy all electronic and paper copies and notify the sender immediately. Mistransmission is not intended to waive confidentiality or privilege. Morgan Stanley reserves the right, to the extent permitted under applicable law, to monitor electronic communications. This message is subject to terms available at the following link: http://www.morganstanley.com/disclaimers If you cannot access these links, please notify us by reply message and we will send the contents to you. By communicating with Morgan Stanley you consent to the foregoing and to the voice recording of conversations with personnel of Morgan Stanley.
