David Boreham wrote: > 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. But even Net::LDAP is not entirely perl - the SSL bits call out to openssl via Net::SSLeay. There may be other C bits called as well. > Is either Mozilla::LDAP or Net::LDAPapi shipped with a popular > Linux distribution today ? Not yet. > > 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). python-ldap++ > > > -- > Fedora-directory-users mailing list > Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3245 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/389-users/attachments/20070110/9d45d27f/attachment.bin
