while my first implementation with LDAP ChangeLog connector (event driven) works fine, my second approach does not: Here I did want to use the LDIF file of a changelog for batch processing. Dependent on the value of the attribute "changetype" (add, ...) an action should be started. However, this attribute just does not appear in the connector and work entry at all. It seems to be suppressed. Strange thing! A bug or a feature???
(My workaround is to rename "changetype" to "mychangetype" in the LDIF input file and lateron use the iterator's after get next hook to set the connector attribute changetype to the value of mychangetype.)
That sounds very strange, Sonja. Can you see the changetype att from an LDAP browser?
In the interim, you should be able to check the operation code tagged on the work Entry to get your add, delete or modify changetypes (modrdn will be if the there is a "newrdn" attribute present).
if (work.getOperation() == "add") ...
If your changetype problem persists, then please send me a log where you dump the conn Entry from the After GetNext Hook of your Changelog Connector and I'll have a look. And please send me the Config as well if that's ok.
-Eddie
On Nov 2, 4:46 pm, Sonja Benz <sonja.b...@web.de> wrote:
> while my first implementation with LDAP ChangeLog connector (event > driven) works fine, my second approach does not: Here I did want to > use the LDIF file of a changelog for batch processing. Dependent on > the value of the attribute "changetype" (add, ...) an action should be > started. However, this attribute just does not appear in the connector > and work entry at all. It seems to be suppressed. Strange thing! A bug > or a feature???
> (My workaround is to rename "changetype" to "mychangetype" in the LDIF > input file and lateron use the iterator's after get next hook to set > the connector attribute changetype to the value of mychangetype.)
Just to follow up here in the forum, the problem here is that the LDIF Parser does not return the "changetype" Attribute like a Changelog Connector does. It just tags the Work Entry so that you can use work.getOperation() as illustrated in my previous post.
If this is a hard requirement for the Parser, then please open a feature request.
|
