[Fedora-directory-users] Is the userRoot database special?

[Rich Megginson]

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://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-directory-users/attachments/20080305/6adc772d/attachment.bin>