Ben Cohen wrote: > Is the userRoot database treated specially in any way by fedora > directory server? > I setup a directory server and made it a supplier of its userRoot > database. I installed a second server and set its default suffix to > the same as the first server's when I created the directory instance > (so the db named 'userRoot' created on the second server had the same > root suffix as the db on the first server). I then replicated the > first server's userRoot database to the second server (first server is > supplier, second is consumer). > My intention is that the second server will carry a read-only replica > of the first server's database but the worry was raised that the > userRoot database might be treated specially by some portion of the > directory server and not like being a read only replica ...? No, there is nothing special about the userRoot database. That's just the name given to the suffix used for user&group data that was configured during set up. The suffix name is what matters, not the database name. > Should this be a concern? Any clarity is appreciated. > Thanks much. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > 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/20080305/6adc772d/attachment.bin
