Re: DirectoryServices
From: Marc Scheuner [MVP ADSI] (m.scheuner_at_inova.SPAMBEGONE.ch)
Date: 07/24/04
- Next message: Abubakar: "RE: Strings.. Objects or not???"
- Previous message: Thomas: "Re: Is it (null == something) or (something == null)?"
- In reply to: MattC: "DirectoryServices"
- Next in thread: MattC: "Re: DirectoryServices"
- Reply: MattC: "Re: DirectoryServices"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 10:49:32 +0200
>However I realised that if we chould take this route everytime I wish to
>display a users name I will have to do a lookup to get the details from the
>to AD after getting the windwos user account from SQL Server.
>
>This sounds rubbish to be frank. Should I just store what I need i.e.,
>First name, surname, email address in the database and us the AD purely for
>authentication. But then doesn't this loose some of the valu eof the AD and
>means there are two sources of info to maintain.
Yes, why would you want to redundantly store user name, e-mail and
such AGAIN in SQL Server, if that's already available in your AD??
That sounds like rubbish! Redundancy is bad - avoid wherever possible!
AD is a directory service that's optimized for read requests - it's
very fast and efficient to read some data from AD - much more so that
from a general purpose SQL server table. AD however is *NOT* optimized
for data that's changing a lot - e..g it would be a bad idea for an
order system or such thing. That's where SQL Server really comes in
handy.
So really, I think the combination of AD for storage of your user data
(which is in there ANYWAY, right?), and SQL Server for your often
changing data *IS* indeed the way to go!
Marc
- Next message: Abubakar: "RE: Strings.. Objects or not???"
- Previous message: Thomas: "Re: Is it (null == something) or (something == null)?"
- In reply to: MattC: "DirectoryServices"
- Next in thread: MattC: "Re: DirectoryServices"
- Reply: MattC: "Re: DirectoryServices"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
