RE: [PEAR-DEV] LiveUser

> From: Markus Wolff [mailto:wolff@21st.de] > Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 12:11 PM > To: smith@dybnet.de > Cc: 'pear-dev' > Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] LiveUser > > Am Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:00:32 +0100 schrieb "Lukas Smith" <smith@dybnet.de>: > > > > What do mean by "mapping of auth and perm containers"? > > > > Well I am talking about the issue of mapping ID's from an auth container > > to an ID in the perm container. As discussed previously the goal is to > > not have to require any modifications to the auth container. > > > > The solution: > > 1) there is a table in the perm container with the following fields > > (field names are not final at all yet): > > auth_name | auth_id | perm_id > > > > auth name: > > will be an arbitrary name given to an auth container in the xml conf > > file (or if none is given it will use the dsn or something like that) > > > > auth_id: > > this will be the id returned by the auth container > > > > perm_id: > > this will be the id used within the perm container > > Ah, I thought we already had something like that. Must have been wishful > thinking :-) > > > 2) optionally the auth container can ask the perm container to generate > > a new id. Then no mapping is required. > > Nah, I like 1) better. > Thats why 2) is optional :-) The advantage of 2) is that we can do away with a query. For people that have complete control over their auth container this is pretty nice. You can of course mix and match 1) and 2). In the XML conf file you can turn mapping "off" on a per auth container basis (default should be "on"). Regards, Lukas