Re: (ITS#6377) test058-syncrepl-asymmetric failed for bdb (exit 3)
by hyc＠symas.com
michael(a)stroeder.com wrote:
> Full_Name: Michael Ströder
> Version: HEAD synced now
> OS: openSUSE Linux 11.2 (x86_64)
> URL:
> Submission from: (NULL) (84.163.61.118)
>
>
> Stopping central master and site2 servers to test start with emtpy db...
> Starting site2 master slapd on TCP/IP port 9013...
> Using ldapsearch to check that site2 master slapd is running...
> Starting site2 search slapd on TCP/IP port 9016...
> Using ldapsearch to check that site2 search slapd is running...
> Starting central master slapd on TCP/IP port 9011...
> Using ldapsearch to check that central master slapd is running...
> Using ldapsearch to check that site2 master received base...
> Using ldapsearch to check that site2 search received base...
> Waiting 1 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes...
> Checking contextCSN after site2 servers repopulated...
> Found 3 errors
>>>>>> ./scripts/test058-syncrepl-asymmetric failed for bdb (exit 3)
> make[2]: *** [bdb-mod] Error 3
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/michael/openldap/HEAD/openldap/tests'
> make[1]: *** [test] Error 2
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/michael/openldap/HEAD/openldap/tests'
> make: *** [test] Error 2
>
>
I'm seeing the same problem here. Still haven't identified the cause, looking...
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
12 years, 6 months
Re: (ITS#6378) Slapadd core dump
by michael＠stroeder.com
acirulli(a)gmail.com wrote:
> Full_Name: Andrea Cirulli
> Version: 2.4.16
> OS: Solaris 9
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (62.77.56.182)
>
>
> Problem with slapadd 2.4.16 using an ldif provided by slapcat 2.3.39
>
> SLAPADD goes always in core dump on entry of ldif such the following:
>
> registeredAddress:: MTEzLjIxMS4yMjUuMTgxIAA=
>
> The base 64 value once converted is "113.211.225.181" + " " + '\0'
Not sure whether slapcat 2.3.39 falsely added the NULL-byte at the end or
whether it's part of your data. Could you please cross-check that with
ldapsearch reading that particular entry?
Nevertheless slapadd should not crash. Rather an error should be reported. But
please try to reproduce the issue with a recent release (at least 2.4.19,
preferrably CVS branch OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_4). Another option would be to
provide sanitized test data to let others try to reproduce it.
Ciao, Michael.
12 years, 6 months
Re: (ITS#6361) Failed assertion in slapd when running on OpenWRT/glibc
by mike＠flyn.org
> Please provide stack traces for each of these assertions. In this case it
> sounds like connection_closing() got called multiple times for the same
> connection, after it had already been fully closed. A trace would help
> confirm
> that.
This is a little odd:
(gdb) run -d 255
Starting program: /usr/sbin/slapd -d 255
must compile with LDAP_DEBUG for debugging
*** "CRASH" ***
Program exited normally.
(gdb) ba
No stack.
I have been running a script, while ldapsearch -x; do sleep 10; done, that
eventually crashes slapd. But gdb provides little feedback, as noted
above.
>> One things to note is that, in addition to being on MIPS32, my platform
>> has only 32MB of memory. I also have a swap file that is 64MB.
>
> In such an environment you won't have enough memory for more than 1 or 2
> server threads. Have you already configured this?
I have just reconfigured slapd to use one thread and removed all indexes
from the configuration. So far, I have not seen a crash. I am no using two
clients to query slapd and have removed that sleep statements so that the
server is continuously queried. I've been running this for about one hour
and will report back if there are any negative results.
12 years, 6 months
Re: (ITS#6365) Bad slapcat output when slapd running
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it
> Howard Chu wrote:
>> Peter Mogensen wrote:
>>> This is mirrormode.
>>> There's no "provider" as such. However, there's one server which is
>>> used
>>> for application access and to minimize disk load on that server, the
>>> plan was to take most backups from the other.
>>> I can't see any difference between what you call "initializing" and
>>> normal running state, except that the difference between server-1 and
>>> server-2 is (somewhat) larger.
>>
>> If the problem is as Ando suggests, then it's because in the syncrepl
>> Refresh
>> phase it's receiving entries out-of-order from the provider. Ando is
>> suggesting that the problem is caused when a child entry is replicated
>> before
>> its parent. Once the Refresh phase ends and it transitions to the
>> Persist
>> phase, all entries' parents will exist and so this particular condition
>> will
>> no longer occur.
>>
>> Of course, no one is saying for certain that this is the explanation,
>> yet.
>
> It sounds reasonable to me :)
> But unless you are not in any way allowed to - ever - make writes to
> more than one server in a mirromode setup, this could (as I hear it)
> potentially happen at any time.
> The only reason I have to only make writes to one server is that I
> currently (this will change) have an application which is dependant on
> making writes and immediately reading back the entry.
>
> As I hear what you're saying is that any write to a server in a
> mirrormode setup could invalidate a slapcat running on the other.
> This would mean that you can never write to more that one server at all
> and that's the only server you can slapcat while running.
> That takes a lot of the "mirror" out of "mirrormode". Doesn't it?
Based on my *very incomplete and possibly wrong* analysis, the problem
would be automatically cured by using back-bdb. Also, fixing back-hdb *if
it's broken at all* should be possible.
p.
12 years, 6 months
(ITS#6378) Slapadd core dump
by acirulli＠gmail.com
Full_Name: Andrea Cirulli
Version: 2.4.16
OS: Solaris 9
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (62.77.56.182)
Problem with slapadd 2.4.16 using an ldif provided by slapcat 2.3.39
SLAPADD goes always in core dump on entry of ldif such the following:
registeredAddress:: MTEzLjIxMS4yMjUuMTgxIAA=
The base 64 value once converted is "113.211.225.181" + " " + '\0'
The output of the slapadd in verbose mode is:
Assertion failed: p == &normalized->bv_val[normalized->bv_len], file
schema_init.c, line 2225
Abort (core dumped)

12 years, 6 months
(ITS#6377) test058-syncrepl-asymmetric failed for bdb (exit 3)
by michael＠stroeder.com
Full_Name: Michael Ströder
Version: HEAD synced now
OS: openSUSE Linux 11.2 (x86_64)
URL:
Submission from: (NULL) (84.163.61.118)
Stopping central master and site2 servers to test start with emtpy db...
Starting site2 master slapd on TCP/IP port 9013...
Using ldapsearch to check that site2 master slapd is running...
Starting site2 search slapd on TCP/IP port 9016...
Using ldapsearch to check that site2 search slapd is running...
Starting central master slapd on TCP/IP port 9011...
Using ldapsearch to check that central master slapd is running...
Using ldapsearch to check that site2 master received base...
Using ldapsearch to check that site2 search received base...
Waiting 1 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes...
Checking contextCSN after site2 servers repopulated...
Found 3 errors
>>>>> ./scripts/test058-syncrepl-asymmetric failed for bdb (exit 3)
make[2]: *** [bdb-mod] Error 3
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/michael/openldap/HEAD/openldap/tests'
make[1]: *** [test] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/michael/openldap/HEAD/openldap/tests'
make: *** [test] Error 2
12 years, 6 months
Re: (ITS#6365) Bad slapcat output when slapd running
by apm＠mutex.dk
Howard Chu wrote:
> Peter Mogensen wrote:
>> This is mirrormode.
>> There's no "provider" as such. However, there's one server which is used
>> for application access and to minimize disk load on that server, the
>> plan was to take most backups from the other.
>> I can't see any difference between what you call "initializing" and
>> normal running state, except that the difference between server-1 and
>> server-2 is (somewhat) larger.
>
> If the problem is as Ando suggests, then it's because in the syncrepl Refresh
> phase it's receiving entries out-of-order from the provider. Ando is
> suggesting that the problem is caused when a child entry is replicated before
> its parent. Once the Refresh phase ends and it transitions to the Persist
> phase, all entries' parents will exist and so this particular condition will
> no longer occur.
>
> Of course, no one is saying for certain that this is the explanation, yet.
It sounds reasonable to me :)
But unless you are not in any way allowed to - ever - make writes to
more than one server in a mirromode setup, this could (as I hear it)
potentially happen at any time.
The only reason I have to only make writes to one server is that I
currently (this will change) have an application which is dependant on
making writes and immediately reading back the entry.
As I hear what you're saying is that any write to a server in a
mirrormode setup could invalidate a slapcat running on the other.
This would mean that you can never write to more that one server at all
and that's the only server you can slapcat while running.
That takes a lot of the "mirror" out of "mirrormode". Doesn't it?
>> If I can't trust slapcat during this
>> phase, how can I trust slapcat for backups?
>
> Does slapcat behave this way on the active server?
I've taking that test setup down now to test other stuff, so I can't say
100%.
/Peter
12 years, 6 months
Re: (ITS#6365) Bad slapcat output when slapd running
by hyc＠symas.com
Peter Mogensen wrote:
> Howard Chu wrote:
>> apm(a)mutex.dk wrote:
>>> Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
>>>> You appear to be using back-hdb.
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> My guess is that if this can fail, e.g. because entries are being
>>>> sync'ed out of order, the DN does not get fixed. If this is the case (I
>>>> couldn't inspect code deep enough to make sure), I'd expect that the DN
>>>> get fixed anyway, though, because missing entries should exist as "glue"
>>>> objects.
>>> yes. But if you plan to use slapcat as a backup mechanism, then it's
>>> still a problem.
>>
>> Sounds like a low priority issue at best. Taking backups of a replica while it
>> is initializing is pointless, just take a backup of the provider instead.
>
> This is mirrormode.
> There's no "provider" as such. However, there's one server which is used
> for application access and to minimize disk load on that server, the
> plan was to take most backups from the other.
> I can't see any difference between what you call "initializing" and
> normal running state, except that the difference between server-1 and
> server-2 is (somewhat) larger.
If the problem is as Ando suggests, then it's because in the syncrepl Refresh
phase it's receiving entries out-of-order from the provider. Ando is
suggesting that the problem is caused when a child entry is replicated before
its parent. Once the Refresh phase ends and it transitions to the Persist
phase, all entries' parents will exist and so this particular condition will
no longer occur.
Of course, no one is saying for certain that this is the explanation, yet.
> If I can't trust slapcat during this
> phase, how can I trust slapcat for backups?
Does slapcat behave this way on the active server?
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
12 years, 6 months
Re: (ITS#6365) Bad slapcat output when slapd running
by apm＠mutex.dk
Howard Chu wrote:
> apm(a)mutex.dk wrote:
>> Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
>>> You appear to be using back-hdb.
>> Yes.
>>
>>> My guess is that if this can fail, e.g. because entries are being
>>> sync'ed out of order, the DN does not get fixed. If this is the case (I
>>> couldn't inspect code deep enough to make sure), I'd expect that the DN
>>> get fixed anyway, though, because missing entries should exist as "glue"
>>> objects.
>> yes. But if you plan to use slapcat as a backup mechanism, then it's
>> still a problem.
>
> Sounds like a low priority issue at best. Taking backups of a replica while it
> is initializing is pointless, just take a backup of the provider instead.
This is mirrormode.
There's no "provider" as such. However, there's one server which is used
for application access and to minimize disk load on that server, the
plan was to take most backups from the other.
I can't see any difference between what you call "initializing" and
normal running state, except that the difference between server-1 and
server-2 is (somewhat) larger. If I can't trust slapcat during this
phase, how can I trust slapcat for backups?
/Peter
12 years, 6 months
