> On 13 Dec 2014, at 08:08, Rich Megginson <rmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 12/12/2014 02:27 PM, William B wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >>>>>> What is the default behaviour if no equality type is defined? >>> From http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512 >>> " >>> >>> If no equality matching is specified for the attribute type: >>> >>> - the attribute (of the type) cannot be used for naming; >>> - when adding the attribute (or replacing all values), no two >>> values may be equivalent (see 2.2); >>> - individual values of a multi-valued attribute are not to be >>> independently added or deleted; >>> - attribute value assertions (such as matching in search >>> filters and comparisons) using values of such a type cannot be >>> performed." >>> >>> Which means, you are not supposed to use it in a search filter. >> >> Ahh that's good to know. This kind of thing should be in the RHDS documentation >> as we couldn't find anything about the topic, and it's an invaluable piece of >> knowledge in solving this issue. > > There is a _lot_ of information in the LDAP RFCs that is not in the RHDS documentation . . . > While that may be the case, I would like to see clearly in the indexing section a description, even brief, of the behaviour when an index with equality is set. Link to the rfc for detailed description even. Perhaps also a warning in the errors file when such an index is created / at start up? >> >>> However, 389 provides a default equality matching rule, which is >>> essentially a memcmp(3). When you create an index, it attempts to >>> use the equality matching rule to create the equality index. I guess >>> the indexing code is getting confused. Do you have >>> a /var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-INST/db/userRoot/maildeliveryoption.db4 >>> file? If so, does it have anything in it? dbscan >>> -f /var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-INST/db/userRoot/maildeliveryoption.db4 >> The db4 file in question was empty. I am assuming that this indicates an issue >> with the indexing yielding no data, but if it was empty, and an index search was >> performed I am assuming that is why our search begins to return no data. > > Correct. Thank you. I appreciate your help and advice. Sincerely William -- 389 users mailing list 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
