Univention Bugzilla – Bug 53259
index: Review / discuss what LDAP indices we need
Last modified: 2024-04-16 17:49:12 CEST
Review / discuss what LDAP indices we need For bug 53191 we decided against adding attributes which produced the "not indexed" warning. To many indices can slow down the LDAP server performance: - https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/451118/openldap-bdb-equality-candidates-memberof-not-indexed As i understand this, every index produces search candidates e.g. "(&(univentionObjectType=users/user)(uid=foo))" one big set of candidates for "univentionObjectType" and a small one for "uid". This is slower than just having an index for "uid" 50000 users -> 2.9ms for both indices, 2.7ms only for uid as an index. - Write operations need to update indices Time to delete a user in a domain with 50000 users 98ms default ucs indices 31ms only uid + objectClass as indices Looking at the numbers above, generally it still seems to be the right approach to add an index, since searches can be magnitudes slower without an index.
There's a maximum number for indices in OpenLDAP: servers/slapd/back-mdb/back-mdb.h:45 > #define MDB_INDICES»»···256