| Author |
Topic: Cons of LDAP |
|
eLDAP
member
offline  |
| |
| posts: |
107 |
| joined: |
08/02/2006 |
| from: |
Austin, TX |
|
|
 |
|
|
| Cons of LDAP |
We hear lots of LDAP being good at this and that, so what's the room for LDAP to grow or any area LDAP is not good at?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eLDAP
member
offline  |
| |
| posts: |
107 |
| joined: |
08/02/2006 |
| from: |
Austin, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
| Con#1 LDAP lacks the capability of transaction |
An LDAP directory should not be treated like a database. There is no transactional capability within LDAP, which means it is not possible to roll back changes or to make a series of changes in a single transaction as in a traditional database.
The lack of transactional capability makes LDAP directories a bad choice for systems that depend on transaction or order processing, such as banking and booking systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eLDAP
member
offline |
| |
| posts: |
107 |
| joined: |
08/02/2006 |
| from: |
Austin, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
| Con#2 LDAP lacks the capability of replication |
Lack of a standard replication mechanism is one of the biggest complaints from enterprise deployers of LDAP. This cause LDAP vendors have to cook their own methodology to replicate data among LDAP servers. There are typical two types of replication architecture: master-slave & multi-master.
As an example, SunOne directory server is one of the early LDAP servers which are based on master-slave architecture. That means one server is designated as the master and contains a writable copy of the directory contents, and the other servers are subordinate or secondary and have read-only copies. When the master server is updated, it replicates the change to the other subordinate servers. This model is much simpler and easier to maintain than a multi-master architecture, but it is also much more limiting especially for global deployments.
Active Directory is one of the first directories to support true multimaster replication where any number of servers can be updated. However, having multimaster capabilities does not come without its pitfalls. The replication is one of the most labor-intensive and troublesome areas within Active Directory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eLDAP
member
offline |
| |
| posts: |
107 |
| joined: |
08/02/2006 |
| from: |
Austin, TX |
|
|
|
|
|
| Con#3 LDAP lacks the capability of synchronization |
Synchronization of disparate directories is another issue for most companies because of the need to support multiple directories within the enterprise.
Most directories available today perform only one of the major directory functions very well. Since many companies have more than one directory, there is a need to synchronize some of the data between them. Currently, there is no standard way to do this. Since a synchronization mechanism was not included in the LDAP specification, most LDAP vendors have been reluctant to work together to form a standard. As a result, there has been a proliferation of metadirectory products.
Metadirectories facilitate the synchronization of data between disparate directories and databases based on business logic. The primary problem with implementing metadirectories is the complexity involved in configuring and maintaining the necessary business logic to keep the various databases and directories in sync.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email To Friend | 
Set Alert To This Topic
New Topic | 
Post Reply 
posted on: 12/27/2011 05:08:52 PM
Edit
Quote
Report
Profile
Reply