Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Using\s+with\s+LDAP\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Using\s+with\s+LDAP\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: "Parag Warudkar" <parag.warudkar@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:44:48 +0530; We are planning to use state threads library in our server application which serves login requests. The UserID/Passwords are stored in LDAP. So the Server needs to do network io with LDAP via the Ne; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00001.html (7,790 bytes)
2. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:58:31 -0400; You'll have to use helper processes for LDAP library functions. You can communicate between your main server process and your helper functions via socketpair(). Those asynchronous LDAP functions are; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00003.html (8,833 bytes)
3. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Gene Shekhtman <gsh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:38:38 -0700; I'd suggest two things: 1. Use very simple LDAP "helper" server that listens to a local (UNIX domain) socket and accept()s connections from the "main" server which calls ST functions (st_connect(), s; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00004.html (9,151 bytes)
4. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:14:17 -0400; On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 02:38:38PM -0700, Gene Shekhtman wrote the following: This should work very well for usual server loads where most people have authenticated themselves and most data is sittin; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00005.html (8,990 bytes)
5. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Gene Shekhtman <gsh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:16:27 -0700; Local "in-process" cache is never useless :) It's just a different level of caching (just like bigger L2 CPU cache doesn't make L1 cache useless). I had in mind about 10 processes or so. If a LDAP qu; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00006.html (8,730 bytes)
6. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:14:21 -0400; On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 05:16:27PM -0700, Gene Shekhtman wrote the following: What I meant is it would be waste of RAM, though I understand there would be a performance gain. I remember sending e-mai; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00007.html (8,863 bytes)
7. Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: "Parag Warudkar" <parag.warudkar@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:44:48 +0530; Hi, We are planning to use state threads library in our server application which serves login requests. The UserID/Passwords are stored in LDAP. So the Server needs to do network io with LDAP via the; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00015.html (7,790 bytes)
8. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:58:31 -0400; You'll have to use helper processes for LDAP library functions. You can communicate between your main server process and your helper functions via socketpair(). Those asynchronous LDAP functions are; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00017.html (8,917 bytes)
9. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Gene Shekhtman <gsh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:38:38 -0700; I'd suggest two things: 1. Use very simple LDAP "helper" server that listens to a local (UNIX domain) socket and accept()s connections from the "main" server which calls ST functions (st_connect(), s; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00018.html (9,220 bytes)
10. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:14:17 -0400; On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 02:38:38PM -0700, Gene Shekhtman wrote the following: This should work very well for usual server loads where most people have authenticated themselves and most data is sittin; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00019.html (9,109 bytes)
11. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Gene Shekhtman <gsh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:16:27 -0700; Local "in-process" cache is never useless :) It's just a different level of caching (just like bigger L2 CPU cache doesn't make L1 cache useless). I had in mind about 10 processes or so. If a LDAP qu; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00020.html (8,866 bytes)
12. Re: Using with LDAP (score: 1): Author: Dan Melomedman <dmelomed@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:14:21 -0400; On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 05:16:27PM -0700, Gene Shekhtman wrote the following: What I meant is it would be waste of RAM, though I understand there would be a performance gain. I remember sending e-mai; /archives/state-threads/2001-07/msg00021.html (9,049 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]