Howard Chu wrote: > > I really wish Net::LDAP would just go away and die. People should be > using Mozilla::LDAP (or Net::LDAPapi), particularly when they're doing > timing measurements. I guess as a monitoring device to say "is it > alive" it's not too crucial, but you have to realize that when it says > it measures the response time of the LDAP server, 99% of the measured > time is actually perl execution, and only 1% is actual network+LDAP > time. (That's not an exaggeration; there is a clear 100:1 difference > in execution time between Net::LDAP and Mozilla::LDAP / Net::LDAPapi.) Still, a pure Perl solution is nice from an integration perspective. Is either Mozilla::LDAP or Net::LDAPapi shipped with a popular Linux distribution today ? In an application like Cacti, the service response time measurement is really aimed at detecting an overloaded service (hence requests queue and response time becomes very high). So I'm not sure a few ms matters one way or the other. btw I'd vote for more effort put in to making the Python LDAP support better and more widely distributed -- Perl itself is evil (IMHO of course).
