openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
21000 discussions

Re: (ITS#6696) back-sql and pagedResultsControl can be extremely heavy due to no LIMIT
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it 10 Nov '10

10 Nov '10

Howard Chu wrote: >> Using back-sql on large databases along with pagedResult control is not >> advisable. Limiting the number of entries returned by each query is not >> viable as well, since some entries might not mathc the LDAP filter, or >> ACLs or so, possibly leading to less than pageSize entries returned >> within one page. PagedResults could be removed from back-sql, and dealt >> with by an overlay that simply pages results returned by back-sql in a >> single internal search; probably this is the preferable approach, since >> it would also result in a reduction of the complexity of back-sql. >> However, I have little interest in improving back-sql, so patches are >> welcome, as usual... > > The sssvlv overlay already intercepts pagedResults requests if they > occur in combination with the Sort control. It would be trivial to > extend it to always intercept pagedResults, and then we can rip the > paging support out of each of the backends. (Of course, there's a > marginal efficiency advantage to letting back-bdb/hdb do its own paging. > A configurable option might be best.) That's more or less what I had in mind. I assume you merged the two functionalities in one overlay because pagedResult needs special care when combined with SSSVLV, and this might be true for other functionalities, though (e.g. having efficient pagedResult; life would be much better without it, since clients do not need it while it makes servers' life harder). With respect to conditionally exploiting native pagedResult capabilities of back-bdb/hdb I only fear some issues related to glued databases. Those could be possibly solved by disabling native back-bdb/hdb pagedResult handling when used in glued databases, or even more granularly, when a search spans more than one database in a glued configuration, delegating the handling to the overlay in those cases. p.

1 0

Re: (ITS#6696) back-sql and pagedResultsControl can be extremely heavy due to no LIMIT
by hyc＠symas.com 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

masarati(a)aero.polimi.it wrote: > Andrew.Gray(a)unlv.edu wrote: >> Full_Name: Andrew Gray >> Version: 2.4.17 >> OS: Debian 5.0 >> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ >> Submission from: (NULL) (131.216.14.1) >> >> >> On receiving LDAP queries with a pagedResultsControl (in this case with a size >> of 250), back-sql generates an extremely inefficient query for every iteration >> in the form of: >> >> SELECT DISTINCT ldap_entries.id,people.local_id,text('UNLVexpperson') AS >> objectClass,ldap_entries.dn AS dn FROM ldap_entries,people,ldap_entry_objclasses >> WHERE people.local_ >> id=ldap_entries.keyval AND ldap_entries.oc_map_id=1 AND upper(ldap_entries.dn) >> LIKE upper('%'||'%OU=PEOPLE,DC=UNLV,DC=EDU') AND ldap_entries.id>250 AND (2=2 OR >> (ldap_entries.id=ldap_entry_objclasses.entry_id AND ldap_entry_objclasses.oc_ >> name='UNLVexpperson')) >> >> (this repeats for id>250, id>500, id>750, etc. etc.) >> >> Ideally (IMO) there really should be a SQL LIMIT applied here, as in this case >> slapd gets back a few tens of thousands of rows on every iteration, and the >> memory usage explodes and eventually gets killed. > > Using back-sql on large databases along with pagedResult control is not > advisable. Limiting the number of entries returned by each query is not > viable as well, since some entries might not mathc the LDAP filter, or > ACLs or so, possibly leading to less than pageSize entries returned > within one page. PagedResults could be removed from back-sql, and dealt > with by an overlay that simply pages results returned by back-sql in a > single internal search; probably this is the preferable approach, since > it would also result in a reduction of the complexity of back-sql. > However, I have little interest in improving back-sql, so patches are > welcome, as usual... The sssvlv overlay already intercepts pagedResults requests if they occur in combination with the Sort control. It would be trivial to extend it to always intercept pagedResults, and then we can rip the paging support out of each of the backends. (Of course, there's a marginal efficiency advantage to letting back-bdb/hdb do its own paging. A configurable option might be best.) -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Re: (ITS#6641) Syncrepl failure with 'overlay unique'
by ondrej.kuznik＠acision.com 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/07/2010 03:26 PM, andrew.findlay(a)skills-1st.co.uk wrote: > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 05:09:07AM -0700, Howard Chu wrote: > >>> We've talked about doing this isolation in the first refresh upon slapd >>> startup. That might still be a good idea. > > It would certainly help to keep the apparent promises made by things > like the uniqueness overlay. Alternatively you could take the view > that the data will converge eventually and that is all that the LDAP > standards promise. We've hit a similar problem and decided to go this way, i.e. allowing the replication to bypass the uniqueness constraints. In RFC 4533, there are only two claims regarding DIT consistency: <quote> 1.2 Intended Usage Upon completion of each synchronization stage of the operation, all information to construct a synchronized client copy of the content has been provided to the client [...]. Except for transient inconsistencies due to concurrent operation (or other) processing at the server, the client copy is an accurate reflection of the content held by the server. Transient inconsistencies will be resolved by subsequent synchronization operations. [...] This protocol is not intended to be used in applications requiring transactional data consistency. </quote> There is no claim that the DIT should stay consistent wrt. any structural restrictions during one synchronization operation. It might be worth noting that trying to replicate the data through as one transaction, like Andrew suggested (quoted below), would still have been impossible without a change in the overlay to allow it to pass through. >>> Doing it on every refresh seems far more problematic, because without some >>> type of multi-version concurrency control, that means making the server >>> non-responsive until the refresh completes. > > That may not be a problem with refresh-and-persist, as in normal > circumstances I would expect updates to arrive at the consumer in the > same order they hit the supplier (so this bug could not trigger). More > difficult for scheduled refresh mode though. Could the consumer server > simply write-lock every entry involved in the refresh while it processes > the list, and then commit the whole lot in one DB transaction? > > Andrew I have put a preliminary version of patches that modify the unique overlay here ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ondrej-kuznik-20101109-unique_bypass_v1.tgz They add a new configuration attribute olcUniqueAllowManageBypass (it is prohibitively long for a name, though) that, if set to TRUE, triggers the uniqueness checks not to be performed if the operation has manage privilegies on the entry. There are three separate patches, configuration code regarding the new attribute, the checks in unique_{add,modify,modrdn} and manpage modifications. Some things that should be sorted out before this is complete from my point of view: 1. While there might be a way to find out whether an operation comes from replication or is really issued by a rootdn, I have not found any. As a workaround, I used the "manage" privilege to the entry as a trigger, since this privilege already allows to change the structural objectclass of an entry, operation otherwise prohibited by RFC 4512. 2. When performing a modifyDN operation, the privilege is checked against the entry to be changed instead of the new entry. I found this approach more appropriate than modifying the entry returned by overlay_entry_get_ov as I do not yet understand the implications of doing that and do not know whether it is possible and ok to create a phony entry by hand just for the call to access_allowed. This is clearly marked as a "FIXME" comment in the patch. 3. The entry attribute used for acl checking might be too broad. However, deriving the attributes needed for each domain seemed too complex. At least when this is the first version of a patch for which I have no indication whether even the general idea is considered worth pursuing. 4. The code is similar in all three cases so the first attempt was to move it into unique_search, but there is not enough information available there and would have to be provided by each of the three functions anyway. Howard and/or others, do you consider this solution valid for this ITS? If yes, could you help me address the things that should be sorted out? Last, but not least, the IPR stuff: The attached modifications to OpenLDAP Software are subject to the following notice: Copyright 2010 Acision Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted only as authorized by the OpenLDAP Public License. Regards, Ondrej Kuznik -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkzZX1QACgkQ9GWxeeH+cXuS6gCdEL7txhDF6ukM3jGAcdZNXuQo lkYAoJXgT8T67OAkETtvYsBuehTV2gO5 =t7jk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.

1 0

Re: (ITS#6696) back-sql and pagedResultsControl can be extremely heavy due to no LIMIT
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

Andrew.Gray(a)unlv.edu wrote: > Full_Name: Andrew Gray > Version: 2.4.17 > OS: Debian 5.0 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (131.216.14.1) > > > On receiving LDAP queries with a pagedResultsControl (in this case with a size > of 250), back-sql generates an extremely inefficient query for every iteration > in the form of: > > SELECT DISTINCT ldap_entries.id,people.local_id,text('UNLVexpperson') AS > objectClass,ldap_entries.dn AS dn FROM ldap_entries,people,ldap_entry_objclasses > WHERE people.local_ > id=ldap_entries.keyval AND ldap_entries.oc_map_id=1 AND upper(ldap_entries.dn) > LIKE upper('%'||'%OU=PEOPLE,DC=UNLV,DC=EDU') AND ldap_entries.id>250 AND (2=2 OR > (ldap_entries.id=ldap_entry_objclasses.entry_id AND ldap_entry_objclasses.oc_ > name='UNLVexpperson')) > > (this repeats for id>250, id>500, id>750, etc. etc.) > > Ideally (IMO) there really should be a SQL LIMIT applied here, as in this case > slapd gets back a few tens of thousands of rows on every iteration, and the > memory usage explodes and eventually gets killed. Using back-sql on large databases along with pagedResult control is not advisable. Limiting the number of entries returned by each query is not viable as well, since some entries might not mathc the LDAP filter, or ACLs or so, possibly leading to less than pageSize entries returned within one page. PagedResults could be removed from back-sql, and dealt with by an overlay that simply pages results returned by back-sql in a single internal search; probably this is the preferable approach, since it would also result in a reduction of the complexity of back-sql. However, I have little interest in improving back-sql, so patches are welcome, as usual... p.

1 0

Re: (ITS#6697) Could OpenLdap automatically generate SSHA Hashed userPassword?
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

changhong_sun(a)yahoo.cn wrote: > Full_Name: Chang Hong Sun > Version: 2.4.23 > OS: SuSe Linux > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (220.248.0.145) > > > Hi All, > > I've installed OpenLdap 2.4.23 in SUSE Linux, and find that: > 1) The OpenLdap supports the SSHA Hash Algorithm by default: could import or > accept the creation of the Users with the {SSHA}/{SHA} Hashed userPassword. > 2) The OpenLdap provides a command "slappasswd" to generate the hashed password, > while it seems that it is not able to generate the password by the OpenLdap > server automatically: after I created a user without Hashed userPassword, I > checked the data and found that the password keep unchanged and hasn't been > Hashed. > > My question is: > Is it possible to make some configuration, so that the OpenLdap server could > automatically transfer the userPassword to Hashed format? Please direct software usage questions to openldap-technical(a)openldap.org; the ITS is intended to track software bugs. This ITS will be closed. p.

1 0

(ITS#6697) Could OpenLdap automatically generate SSHA Hashed userPassword?
by changhong_sun＠yahoo.cn 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

Full_Name: Chang Hong Sun Version: 2.4.23 OS: SuSe Linux URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (220.248.0.145) Hi All, I've installed OpenLdap 2.4.23 in SUSE Linux, and find that: 1) The OpenLdap supports the SSHA Hash Algorithm by default: could import or accept the creation of the Users with the {SSHA}/{SHA} Hashed userPassword. 2) The OpenLdap provides a command "slappasswd" to generate the hashed password, while it seems that it is not able to generate the password by the OpenLdap server automatically: after I created a user without Hashed userPassword, I checked the data and found that the password keep unchanged and hasn't been Hashed. My question is: Is it possible to make some configuration, so that the OpenLdap server could automatically transfer the userPassword to Hashed format? Thanks and Best Regards, Sun Chang Hong

1 0

Re: (ITS#6683) DDS fails with expired branches
by hyc＠symas.com 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

Petteri.Stenius(a)ubisecure.com wrote: > Hello, > > Further investigation shows this issue is caused by operator LE search > failing with indexed attributes. Also this indexed search issue is NOT > limited to DDS.=20 > > I have reproduced the issue with integerOrderingMatch and > generalizedTimeOrderingMatch.=20 > > The piece of code I find suspicious is in servers/back-bdb/idl.c, > somewhere in the middle it reads > > /* skip presence key on range inequality lookups */ > while (rc =3D=3D 0&& kptr->size !=3D len) { > rc =3D cursor->c_get( cursor, kptr,&data, flags | > DB_NEXT_NODUP ); > } > > If I remove this block then LE search works as expected with indexed > attributes. The key here seems to be the DB_NEXT_NODUP flag. This flag > causes the iterator block a few lines below to return partial matches. That implies that there's something else corrupt in the index, because the presence key will never be the same size as an equality key. > > Thanks, > Petteri > > -----Original Message----- > From: openldap-bugs-bounces(a)OpenLDAP.org > [mailto:openldap-bugs-bounces@OpenLDAP.org] On Behalf Of > petteri.stenius(a)ubisecure.com > Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 1:35 PM > To: openldap-its(a)openldap.org > Subject: (ITS#6683) DDS fails with expired branches > > Full_Name:=20 > Version: 2.4.23 > OS: Linux > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (195.197.205.34) > > > Hello, > > I have a directory with branches of dynamicObject entries. It looks like > if the > entryExpireTimestamp value is the same on objects within a branch then > DDS > search for expired objects will only find the top-most object. This > results in > remove failing with message > > DDS dn=3D"cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest" is non-leaf; deferring. > > > To reproduce > > OpenLDAP 2.4.23, Berkeley DB 4.6.21 > > Use slapadd to prepare directory with following > > dn: cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > objectClass: top > objectClass: applicationProcess > cn: Root > > dn: cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > objectClass: top > objectClass: device > objectClass: dynamicObject > entryTTL: 60 > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > cn: top > > dn: cn=3Dleaf1,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > objectClass: top > objectClass: device > objectClass: dynamicObject > entryTTL: 60 > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > cn: leaf1 > > dn: cn=3Dleaf2,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > objectClass: top > objectClass: device > objectClass: dynamicObject > entryTTL: 60 > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > cn: leaf2 > > dn: cn=3Dleaf3,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > objectClass: top > objectClass: device > objectClass: dynamicObject > entryTTL: 60 > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > cn: leaf3 > > > Relevant slapd.conf entries > > database bdb > suffix "cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" > rootdn "cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" > rootpw "password" > > overlay dds > dds-default-ttl 3600 > dds-min-ttl 60 > dds-interval 60 > dds-state true > index entryExpireTimestamp eq,pres > > access to dn.subtree=3D"cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" > by users write > by * read > > > Running "slapd -d 1 -d 256" produces following > > put_filter: > "(&(objectClass=3DdynamicObject)(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z)= > )" > put_filter: AND > put_filter_list > "(objectClass=3DdynamicObject)(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z)" > put_filter: "(objectClass=3DdynamicObject)" > put_filter: simple > put_simple_filter: "objectClass=3DdynamicObject" > put_filter: "(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z)" > put_filter: simple > put_simple_filter: "entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z" > ber_scanf fmt ({mm}) ber: > ber_scanf fmt ({mm}) ber: > =3D> bdb_search > bdb_dn2entry("cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") > =3D> bdb_dn2id("cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") > <=3D bdb_dn2id: got id=3D0x1 > entry_decode: "cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" > <=3D entry_decode(cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest) > search_candidates: base=3D"cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest" (0x00000001) scope=3D2 > =3D> bdb_dn2idl("cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") > =3D> bdb_equality_candidates (objectClass) > =3D> key_read > <=3D bdb_index_read: failed (-30989) > <=3D bdb_equality_candidates: id=3D0, first=3D0, last=3D0 > =3D> bdb_equality_candidates (objectClass) > =3D> key_read > <=3D bdb_index_read 4 candidates > <=3D bdb_equality_candidates: id=3D4, first=3D2, last=3D5 > =3D> bdb_inequality_candidates (entryExpireTimestamp) > =3D> key_read > <=3D bdb_index_read 1 candidates > =3D> key_read > <=3D bdb_index_read: failed (-30989) > <=3D bdb_inequality_candidates: id=3D1, first=3D2, last=3D2 > bdb_search_candidates: id=3D1 first=3D2 last=3D2 > entry_decode: "cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" > <=3D entry_decode(cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest) > =3D> bdb_dn2id("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") > <=3D bdb_dn2id: got id=3D0x2 > send_ldap_result: conn=3D-1 op=3D0 p=3D0 > bdb_dn2entry("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") > =3D> bdb_dn2id_children("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") > <=3D bdb_dn2id_children("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest"): (0) > send_ldap_result: conn=3D-1 op=3D0 p=3D0 > DDS dn=3D"cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest" is non-leaf; deferring. > DDS expired=3D0 > > > ldapsearch "(entryExpireTimestamp=3D*)" produces > > dn: cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > > dn: cn=3Dleaf1,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > > dn: cn=3Dleaf2,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > > dn: cn=3Dleaf3,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > > > where ldapsearch "(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101024113626Z)" only finds > > dn: cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest > entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z > > > If I change all timestamps to distinct values then expiration of > complete > branches works as expected. > > > Thanks, > Petteri > > > -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

RE: (ITS#6683) DDS fails with expired branches
by Petteri.Stenius＠ubisecure.com 08 Nov '10

08 Nov '10

Hello, Further investigation shows this issue is caused by operator LE search failing with indexed attributes. Also this indexed search issue is NOT limited to DDS.=20 I have reproduced the issue with integerOrderingMatch and generalizedTimeOrderingMatch.=20 The piece of code I find suspicious is in servers/back-bdb/idl.c, somewhere in the middle it reads /* skip presence key on range inequality lookups */ while (rc =3D=3D 0 && kptr->size !=3D len) { rc =3D cursor->c_get( cursor, kptr, &data, flags | DB_NEXT_NODUP ); } If I remove this block then LE search works as expected with indexed attributes. The key here seems to be the DB_NEXT_NODUP flag. This flag causes the iterator block a few lines below to return partial matches. Thanks, Petteri -----Original Message----- From: openldap-bugs-bounces(a)OpenLDAP.org [mailto:openldap-bugs-bounces@OpenLDAP.org] On Behalf Of petteri.stenius(a)ubisecure.com Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 1:35 PM To: openldap-its(a)openldap.org Subject: (ITS#6683) DDS fails with expired branches Full_Name:=20 Version: 2.4.23 OS: Linux URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (195.197.205.34) Hello, I have a directory with branches of dynamicObject entries. It looks like if the entryExpireTimestamp value is the same on objects within a branch then DDS search for expired objects will only find the top-most object. This results in remove failing with message DDS dn=3D"cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest" is non-leaf; deferring. To reproduce OpenLDAP 2.4.23, Berkeley DB 4.6.21 Use slapadd to prepare directory with following dn: cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest objectClass: top objectClass: applicationProcess cn: Root dn: cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest objectClass: top objectClass: device objectClass: dynamicObject entryTTL: 60 entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z cn: top dn: cn=3Dleaf1,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest objectClass: top objectClass: device objectClass: dynamicObject entryTTL: 60 entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z cn: leaf1 dn: cn=3Dleaf2,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest objectClass: top objectClass: device objectClass: dynamicObject entryTTL: 60 entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z cn: leaf2 dn: cn=3Dleaf3,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest objectClass: top objectClass: device objectClass: dynamicObject entryTTL: 60 entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z cn: leaf3 Relevant slapd.conf entries database bdb suffix "cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" rootdn "cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" rootpw "password" overlay dds dds-default-ttl 3600 dds-min-ttl 60 dds-interval 60 dds-state true index entryExpireTimestamp eq,pres access to dn.subtree=3D"cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" by users write by * read Running "slapd -d 1 -d 256" produces following put_filter: "(&(objectClass=3DdynamicObject)(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z)= )" put_filter: AND put_filter_list "(objectClass=3DdynamicObject)(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z)" put_filter: "(objectClass=3DdynamicObject)" put_filter: simple put_simple_filter: "objectClass=3DdynamicObject" put_filter: "(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z)" put_filter: simple put_simple_filter: "entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101025082446Z" ber_scanf fmt ({mm}) ber: ber_scanf fmt ({mm}) ber: =3D> bdb_search bdb_dn2entry("cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") =3D> bdb_dn2id("cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") <=3D bdb_dn2id: got id=3D0x1 entry_decode: "cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" <=3D entry_decode(cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest) search_candidates: base=3D"cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest" (0x00000001) scope=3D2 =3D> bdb_dn2idl("cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") =3D> bdb_equality_candidates (objectClass) =3D> key_read <=3D bdb_index_read: failed (-30989) <=3D bdb_equality_candidates: id=3D0, first=3D0, last=3D0 =3D> bdb_equality_candidates (objectClass) =3D> key_read <=3D bdb_index_read 4 candidates <=3D bdb_equality_candidates: id=3D4, first=3D2, last=3D5 =3D> bdb_inequality_candidates (entryExpireTimestamp) =3D> key_read <=3D bdb_index_read 1 candidates =3D> key_read <=3D bdb_index_read: failed (-30989) <=3D bdb_inequality_candidates: id=3D1, first=3D2, last=3D2 bdb_search_candidates: id=3D1 first=3D2 last=3D2 entry_decode: "cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest" <=3D entry_decode(cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest) =3D> bdb_dn2id("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") <=3D bdb_dn2id: got id=3D0x2 send_ldap_result: conn=3D-1 op=3D0 p=3D0 bdb_dn2entry("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") =3D> bdb_dn2id_children("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest") <=3D bdb_dn2id_children("cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest"): (0) send_ldap_result: conn=3D-1 op=3D0 p=3D0 DDS dn=3D"cn=3Dtop,cn=3Droot,dc=3Dtest" is non-leaf; deferring. DDS expired=3D0 ldapsearch "(entryExpireTimestamp=3D*)" produces dn: cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z dn: cn=3Dleaf1,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z dn: cn=3Dleaf2,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z dn: cn=3Dleaf3,cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z where ldapsearch "(entryExpireTimestamp<=3D20101024113626Z)" only finds dn: cn=3Dtop,cn=3DRoot,dc=3Dtest entryExpireTimestamp: 20101024113626Z If I change all timestamps to distinct values then expiration of complete branches works as expected. Thanks, Petteri

1 0

Re: (ITS#6693) Value dependent ACL issues
by rhafer＠suse.de 08 Nov '10

08 Nov '10

Hm, that patch was obviously wrong. Even though it resulted in working value-dependent ACLs, it completely broke ACL caching. This patch should work better: ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- a/servers/slapd/slap.h +++ b/servers/slapd/slap.h @@ -1557,6 +1557,7 @@ typedef struct AccessControlState { /* Value dependent acl where processing can restart */ AccessControl *as_vd_acl; + int as_vd_acl_present; int as_vd_acl_count; slap_mask_t as_vd_mask; @@ -1567,7 +1568,7 @@ typedef struct AccessControlState { /* True if started to process frontend ACLs */ int as_fe_done; } AccessControlState; -#define ACL_STATE_INIT { NULL, ACL_NONE, NULL, 0, ACL_PRIV_NONE, -1, 0 } +#define ACL_STATE_INIT { NULL, ACL_NONE, NULL, 0, 0, ACL_PRIV_NONE, -1, 0 } typedef struct AclRegexMatches { int dn_count; --- a/servers/slapd/acl.c +++ b/servers/slapd/acl.c @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ slap_access_allowed( state = &acl_state; if ( state->as_desc == desc && state->as_access == access && - state->as_vd_acl != NULL ) + state->as_vd_acl_present ) { a = state->as_vd_acl; count = state->as_vd_acl_count; @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ access_allowed_mask( if ( state->as_desc == desc && state->as_access == access && state->as_result != -1 && - state->as_vd_acl == NULL ) + !state->as_vd_acl_present ) { Debug( LDAP_DEBUG_ACL, "=> access_allowed: result was in cache (%s)\n", @@ -615,7 +615,8 @@ slap_acl_get( continue; } - if ( state->as_vd_acl == NULL ) { + if ( !state->as_vd_acl_present ) { + state->as_vd_acl_present = 1; state->as_vd_acl = prev; state->as_vd_acl_count = *count - 1; ACL_PRIV_ASSIGN ( state->as_vd_mask, *mask ); @@ -714,7 +715,8 @@ slap_acl_get( * Record value-dependent access control state */ #define ACL_RECORD_VALUE_STATE do { \ - if( state && state->as_vd_acl == NULL ) { \ + if( state && !state->as_vd_acl_present ) { \ + state->as_vd_acl_present = 1; \ state->as_vd_acl = a; \ state->as_vd_acl_count = count; \ ACL_PRIV_ASSIGN( state->as_vd_mask, *mask ); \ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Comments welcome. Ralf

1 0

Re: (ITS#6686) VLV overlay fails to handle multiple search operations per LDAP connection
by raphael.ouazana＠linagora.com 05 Nov '10

05 Nov '10

Hi ! Le Ven 29 octobre 2010 11:12, hyc(a)symas.com a écrit : > I guess as long as you observe the svi_max config parameter, there's no > reason > not to adopt your suggestion. Feel free to followup here with your patch > for > review. Here is the patch: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/raphael-ouazana-101105-sssvlv-multiple-requ… It applies to HEAD of today. If you need it, I can send you a patch for RE24 too. The patch includes the modification of the man page. Legal notice: This patch file is derived from OpenLDAP Software. All of the modifications to OpenLDAP Software represented in this following patch were developed by Raphael Ouazana raphael.ouazana(a)linagora.com. These modifications are not subject to any license of Linagora. The attached modifications to OpenLDAP Software are subject to the following notice: Copyright 2010 Raphael Ouazana, Linagora Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted only as authorized by the OpenLDAP Public License. Regards, Raphaël Ouazana

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs