A pity we can't upgrade, I have nice scripts for import and export of databases and configs. 
Andreas



"Luchesar V. ILIEV" <luchesar.iliev at gmail.com> schrieb:

>On 07/04/2011 15:52, Vedrin Jeliazkov wrote:
>>> Given your below results, the most important
>>> step besides upgrading will be a real powerful LDAP service for
>>> configuration store.
>> 
>> Yes, this is simply a must. In fact I'm convinced that as long as we
>> stick to the current rather resource demanding AA solution that we've
>> designed and implemented, we should probably run it on bare hardware,
>> not "in the cloud", in order to ensure satisfying performance.
>Another
>> important aspect would be fault tolerance (both OpenAM and OpenDJ
>> support load-balancing, failover and federating but this needs to be
>> investigated/tested further). In addition, for such a critical
>> component such as AA it is often required to have multiple servers,
>> running at different physical locations, to ensure proper level of
>> availability.
>
>Hope you don't mind if I add yet another aspect: security. From this
>standpoint, not only it's desirable to avoid virtualization (as the
>added technical complexity means much less control), but it's even
>better to deploy such services on dedicated hardware.
>
>Overall, a serious centralized AA system would require careful planning
>starting from the very physical location where it would be deployed (it
>should, obviously, allow for tight control of who and when has access
>to
>the hardware). And, as security is by definition a dynamic process,
>never a static condition, that system would need constant attention:
>monitoring, software management (at the very least, patching
>regularly),
>proactive protection and contingency preparedness.
>
>This, again, all speaks strongly in favour of a dedicated system.
>
>Best regards,
>Luchesar
>_______________________________________________
>Development mailing list
>Development at opentox.org
>http://www.opentox.org/mailman/listinfo/development

-- 
http://www.maunz.de