Hello,
we just has the same crash with OpenLDAP 2.4.49. I think this issue
should be reopened as it was not fixed.
The core dump given by Maxime can be used to dig into the bug. We can
provide other information if needed.
--
Clément Oudot | Identity Solutions Manager
clement.oudot(a)worteks.com
Worteks | https://www.worteks.com
--On Monday, February 17, 2020 4:28 PM +0000 biswas.raju(a)gmail.com wrote:
> Full_Name: Raju Biswas
> Version: 2.4.44
Hello,
The ITS system is for reporting bugs, not help requests. If you need help
use the openldap-technical(a)openldap.org email list, as that is what it is
for. This ITS will be closed.
Regards,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
<http://www.symas.com>
Full_Name: Raju Biswas
Version: 2.4.44
OS: RHEL7.4
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (14.141.44.130)
My requirement is to add the posixGroup and groupofNames object class together.
To achieve this, I used the link
https://devopsideas.com/openldap-linux-client-ldap-integration/
I need help on this. If you need more info kindly mail me so that I can provide
more information.
I added the customposixGroup and then added the group as
dn: cn=server_dev,ou=graylog,ou=rgroup,dc=rad,dc=com
objectclass: customposixGroup
objectclass: groupOfNames
cn: server_dev
gidNumber: 7000
description: Server Dev Group
member: uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com
User added as
dn: uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=comcn: aron.francis
givenName: aron.francis
sn: useruid: aron.francis
uidNumber: 7001gidNumber: 7000
homeDirectory: /home/aron.francis
objectClass: top
objectClass: posixAccount
objectClass: shadowAccountobjectClass: inetOrgPerson
objectClass: organizationalPerson
objectClass: personloginShell: /bin/bash
userPassword: {SHA}Gf3pq4puDhvQ/KIgE7c1QQixnM4=
memberOf: cn=server_dev,ou=graylog,ou=rgroup,dc=rad,dc=com
Configured the sssduid=7001(aron.francis(a)rad.com) gid=7000 groups=7000
Help
I wanted help on why the group name is not getting displayed when I use the id
command from the LDAP client.
But if I use posixGroup alone and not groupOfName object class then the group
name is getting displayed.
I need to use both posixGroup and groupOfNames
[root@rad testing_dev]# ldapsearch -H ldaps:// -x -b "dc=rad,dc=com"
"uid=aron.francis" "member=uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com"
# extended LDIF
#
# LDAPv3
# base <dc=rad,dc=com> with scope subtree
# filter: uid=aron.francis
# requesting: member=uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com
#
# aron.francis, People, rad.com
dn: uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com
# search result
search: 2
result: 0 Success
# numResponses: 2
# numEntries: 1
[root@radisys testing_dev]# ldapsearch -H ldaps:// -x -b "dc=rad,dc=com"
"member=uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com"
# extended LDIF
#
# LDAPv3
# base <dc=rad,dc=com> with scope subtree
# filter: member=uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com
# requesting: ALL
#
# server_dev, graylog, rgroup, rad.com
dn: cn=server_dev,ou=graylog,ou=rgroup,dc=rad,dc=com
objectClass: top
objectClass: aposixGroup
objectClass: groupOfNames
cn: server_dev
gidNumber: 7000
description: Server Dev Group
member: uid=aron.francis,ou=People,dc=rad,dc=com
# search result
search: 2
result: 0 Success
# numResponses: 2
# numEntries: 1
[root@rad testing_dev]#
hyc(a)symas.com wrote:
> Kris Zyp wrote:
>> Sorry to keep pestering, but just pinging about this patch again, as I still think this fix could benefit windows users. And at this point, I think I can say we
>> have tested it pretty well, running on our servers for almost a year :).
>
> Looks like this patch is against the 0.9 release branch. I hit a bunch of conflicts
> trying to apply it to mdb.master. We'll be stopping work on 0.9 soon, and getting
> LMDB 1.0 out the door finally, so can you please verify that your changes will work
> on mdb.master as well?
I was manually applying this patch to mdb.master and see something odd in the changes to mdb_page_flush.
Why did you move the MIPS-specific CACHEFLUSH invocation?
>
>> Thanks,
>> Kris
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:56 PM Kris Zyp <kriszyp(a)gmail.com <mailto:kriszyp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Checking on this again, is this still a possibility for merging into LMDB? This fix is still working great (improved performance) on our systems.
>> Thanks,
>> Kris
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 1:04 PM Kris Zyp <kriszyp(a)gmail.com <mailto:kriszyp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Is this still being considered/reviewed? Let me know if there are any other changes you would like me to make. This patch has continued to yield
>> significant and reliable performance improvements for us, and seems like it would be nice for this to be available for other Windows users.
>>
>> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:52 PM Kris Zyp <kriszyp(a)gmail.com <mailto:kriszyp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> For the sake of putting this in the email thread (other code discussion in GitHub), here is the latest squashed commit of the proposed patch (with
>> the on-demand, retained overlapped array to reduce re-malloc and opening event handles):
>> https://github.com/kriszyp/node-lmdb/commit/726a9156662c703bf3d453aab75ee22…
>>
>
>
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
Kris Zyp wrote:
> Sorry to keep pestering, but just pinging about this patch again, as I still think this fix could benefit windows users. And at this point, I think I can say we
> have tested it pretty well, running on our servers for almost a year :).
Looks like this patch is against the 0.9 release branch. I hit a bunch of conflicts
trying to apply it to mdb.master. We'll be stopping work on 0.9 soon, and getting
LMDB 1.0 out the door finally, so can you please verify that your changes will work
on mdb.master as well?
> Thanks,
> Kris
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:56 PM Kris Zyp <kriszyp(a)gmail.com <mailto:kriszyp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Checking on this again, is this still a possibility for merging into LMDB? This fix is still working great (improved performance) on our systems.
> Thanks,
> Kris
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 1:04 PM Kris Zyp <kriszyp(a)gmail.com <mailto:kriszyp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Is this still being considered/reviewed? Let me know if there are any other changes you would like me to make. This patch has continued to yield
> significant and reliable performance improvements for us, and seems like it would be nice for this to be available for other Windows users.
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:52 PM Kris Zyp <kriszyp(a)gmail.com <mailto:kriszyp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> For the sake of putting this in the email thread (other code discussion in GitHub), here is the latest squashed commit of the proposed patch (with
> the on-demand, retained overlapped array to reduce re-malloc and opening event handles):
> https://github.com/kriszyp/node-lmdb/commit/726a9156662c703bf3d453aab75ee22…
>
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
--eAbsdosE1cNLO4uF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 09:38:05AM +0000, tokos(a)ipp.cas.cz wrote:
> Several logins on locked account with operational attribute pwdAccountLockedTime
> ends with crash slapd.
Hi Stanislav,
I've tried to reproduce the issue, but everything works just fine for
me with the attached configuration.
Are you using any other overlays and modules apart from ppolicy? It
would be best if you could attach your configuration (without
passwords), backtrace and other set up needed to reproduce the
issue.
Thanks,
--
Ondřej Kuzník
Senior Software Engineer
Symas Corporation http://www.symas.com
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP
--eAbsdosE1cNLO4uF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="slapd.conf"
include ./re24/servers/slapd/schema/core.schema
include ./re24/servers/slapd/schema/cosine.schema
include ./re24/servers/slapd/schema/inetorgperson.schema
include ./re24/servers/slapd/schema/ppolicy.schema
include rfc2307bis.schema
moduleload ./re24/servers/slapd/overlays/ppolicy.la
database mdb
directory ./db
suffix dc=compass
overlay ppolicy
ppolicy_default cn=ppolicy,ou=policies,dc=compass
--eAbsdosE1cNLO4uF--
--On Thursday, February 13, 2020 4:50 PM +0000 bananashake2004(a)yahoo.de
wrote:
> Full_Name: Stefan Koch
> Version: 2.4.44
Hello,
The 2.4.44 release is over 4 years old. Please use a current OpenLDAP
release prior to reporting bugs. This ITS will be closed.
Regards,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
<http://www.symas.com>
Full_Name: Stefan Koch
Version: 2.4.44
OS: Debian Stretch
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (2001:4dd0:f0a3:2:a44f:a486:843b:bdde)
Valgrind shows a memory leak in slapd that will lead to successive increment of
memory consumption at runtime.
valgrind --tool=memcheck --leak-check=yes --num-callers=50 /usr/sbin/slapd -d
[...]
==26332== 22,000 (80 direct, 21,920 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely
lost in loss record 1,768 of 1,791
==26332== at 0x4C2DBC5: calloc (in
/usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==26332== by 0x5090D24: ber_memcalloc_x (in
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/liblber-2.4.so.2.10.7)
==26332== by 0x15CEC2: ch_calloc (in /usr/sbin/slapd)
==26332== by 0x9D8582C: ???
==26332== by 0x9D8E048: ???
==26332== by 0x143E40: fe_op_search (in /usr/sbin/slapd)
==26332== by 0x143803: do_search (in /usr/sbin/slapd)
==26332== by 0x141485: ??? (in /usr/sbin/slapd)
==26332== by 0x141764: ??? (in /usr/sbin/slapd)
==26332== by 0x4E47FD9: ??? (in
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libldap_r-2.4.so.2.10.7)
==26332== by 0x69024A3: start_thread (pthread_create.c:456)
==26332== LEAK SUMMARY:
==26332== definitely lost: 3,555 bytes in 209 blocks
==26332== indirectly lost: 22,510 bytes in 297 blocks
==26332== possibly lost: 41,688 bytes in 66 blocks
==26332== still reachable: 4,749,541 bytes in 10,436 blocks
==26332== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
This bug was already reported here:
https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/200507/msg00053.html