Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Pass options to ldap operations #33

Open
ptusch opened this issue Jan 18, 2018 · 6 comments
Open

Pass options to ldap operations #33

ptusch opened this issue Jan 18, 2018 · 6 comments

Comments

@ptusch
Copy link

ptusch commented Jan 18, 2018

Currently, we don't pass any options to ldap operations but that should be done.
One major issue is the timeout. This seems too be hardcoded on C.
Other options that should be passed are limit of results.

Maybe go to ldapjs and steal some ideas.
Having hardcoded timeouts actually breaks the benchmark :(

@ptusch ptusch changed the title Pass options to ldap search Pass options to ldap operations Jan 18, 2018
@Radu94
Copy link
Contributor

Radu94 commented Jan 18, 2018

Hmm...i think we did that largely because it's a server setting that can't really be altered from the client, let me check what's what and i'll get back to you :)

Only option that may be worth considering is the attributes one, but I didn't see the point at that time since you can easily filter it out whichever way you want it in js after getting the response.

@ptusch
Copy link
Author

ptusch commented Jan 18, 2018

It sounds really weird if we aren't able to set the timeout. That siounds like a client option..

@cosminghitea
Copy link
Contributor

Actually LDAP can set for client and server some timelimit for there operation:

  1. The server side can set timelimit and on that amount of time will spend answering the request.
  2. The client can set the timeout for a operation to say how long to wait until the request is over.

@cosminghitea
Copy link
Contributor

@ptusch Do you want to add other options or just timeLimit? Becouse the timeLimit is now merge into dev and I can close this issue.

@ptusch
Copy link
Author

ptusch commented Jan 31, 2018

@cosminghitea
We'll pass more when we need them.
If the implementation passes an object, it shouldn't be a problem.

@ptusch
Copy link
Author

ptusch commented Jan 31, 2018

@cosminghitea I couldn't find the use of an object in the development branch.
Didn't we discuss that last Friday?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants