Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

[Jorj Bauer <>]

Thanks.

Any data on whether or not specific OpenLDAP back-ends made significant 
differences?

-- Jorj

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 10:50, Michael R Gettes 
> <>
>  wrote:
> 
> I received only a few replies.  Others have run into this limitation of 
> openldap not being able to support large static group objects. The problem 
> is really large numbers of multi-valued attributes (not just group 
> objects).  My observation is 5 seconds to update when the group object 
> becomes greater than 35K-40K members.  Apparently, openldap has to 
> regenerate the member/uniquemember attributes for the entire object each 
> time.  This appears to be a known issue with openldap since at least 
> October of 2003.  People have switched to using 389/sun-oracle (the iPlanet 
> derivatives) or Active Directory.  There are probably other directory 
> servers able to support large group objects as well - but it would appear 
> openldap and derivates have this problem.
> 
> i hope this helps.
> 
> /mrg
> 
>> On Jan 26, 2017, at 10:22 AM, Jorj Bauer 
>> <>
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I'd love to hear an anonymized roll-up of what you find. We're in early 
>> days of Grouper here and are picking a new LDAP back-end to replace our 
>> Oracle DSEE - perfect timing for us to find out what our future troubles 
>> are going to look like...
>> 
>> -- Jorj
>> 
>> 
>>> On 01/26/2017 09:49 AM, Michael R Gettes wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> A few months ago there was discussion around large groups for grouper.  I 
>>> believe someone from either UCLA or Oregon State (or maybe some place 
>>> else) indicated they had groups of 400K.  Would those people kindly 
>>> contact me off list?  I have a couple of questions for you - not about 
>>> grouper perf concerns, but about non-grouper perf concerns.
>>> 
>>> Thank you!
>>> 
>>> /mrg
>>> 
>