openldap-bugs September 2020

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

4 participants
305 discussions

Exhausting Locked SEM_UNDO Semaphores on MacOS
by Kris Zyp 20 Oct '20

20 Oct '20

In LMDB, if you attempt to open more than 10 transactions (on different environments) on one process on MacOS, then mdb_txn_begin will fail. This can be reproduced by opening 11 different database environments in one process, and calling mdb_txn_begin (as write transactions) on each one. The 11th one will return EINVAL. I believe this is because (on this OS, MacOS 10.13.6) the System V semaphores have a limit of 10 SEM_UNDO locked semaphores on one process. So when mdb_txn_begin attempts to open an 11th transaction, the mdb_sem_wait/semop call fails, returning EINVAL. I was testing with latest LMDB from mdb.master. Once I finally debugged this and figured out the issue, I have been able to work around it by compiling with MDB_USE_POSIX_SEM which seems to resolve the issue. But this still leaves a few questions: Is there any issue with compiling with MDB_USE_POSIX_SEM on MacOS? Would it be better if LMDB defaulted to this shared lock implementation for this OS? And/or would there be value in LMDB providing a more specific error message in this situation? The documentation doesn't indicate EINVAL as a possible return value for mdb_txn_begin, and this is a very generic error with little indication of the root problem, that was rather confusing to me, at least. Or is there an expectation that processes can only open a limited number of database environments (and have open transactions on them)? (Our server typically has about 30 environments open with about 2-16 dbs/env, with many concurrent transactions, without issue on other OSes.) I would be happy to put together a patch for this, but I am not sure of the reasons for the selection of the different shared lock implementations on different OSes. Anyway, I'd be glad to help contribute a patch if there is a specific way this should work. Thank you!

2 6

[Issue 9351] New: Always build monitor, and force it to be static.
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9351 Issue ID: 9351 Summary: Always build monitor, and force it to be static. Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- With 2.5, the monitor backend should always be enabled and built as a static module rather than dynamic. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9349] New: Performance problem when trying to remove a value from an indexed attribute
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9349 Issue ID: 9349 Summary: Performance problem when trying to remove a value from an indexed attribute Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.45 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: gbuades(a)soffid.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 762 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=762&action=edit Patch to improve attribute removal I have an LDAP with MDB backend, and a groupOfUniqueNames with 50.000 members. The uniqueMember attribute is indexed. When I try to remove a single user, the process takes more or less one minute to complete. After debugging, I've just found out the process to identify the old values to remove from the index is not optimum, as the time required to compare the old and the new values depends on number of values ^ 2. Taking advantage of the fact, that the values in the old and new attributes are ordered in the same way, I've build a patch to opmtimize this search process. Now, the same operation takes 0.2 seconds, when it used to take 50s. Thanks a lot for your effort, and I hope this contribution helps you and other users. The attached file is derived from OpenLDAP Software. All of the modifications to OpenLDAP Software represented in the following patch(es) were developed by Soffid. Soffid has not assigned rights and/or interest in this work to any party. I, Gabriel Buades am authorized by Soffid, my employer, to release this work under the following terms. Soffid hereby place the following modifications to OpenLDAP Software (and only these modifications) into the public domain. Hence, these modifications may be freely used and/or redistributed for any purpose with or without attribution and/or other notice. The attached modifications to OpenLDAP Software are subject to the following notice: Copyright 2020 Soffid Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted only as authorized by the OpenLDAP Public License. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 10

[Issue 9348] New: libldap uses deprecated symbols sys_errlist and sys_nerr
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9348 Issue ID: 9348 Summary: libldap uses deprecated symbols sys_errlist and sys_nerr Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.53 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ditu.alexandru(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Starting with libc >= 2.32 the symbols sys_errlist and sys_nerr are removed: From the release notes (https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob_plain;f=NEWS;hb=HEAD): * The deprecated symbols sys_errlist, _sys_errlist, sys_nerr, and _sys_nerr are no longer available to newly linked binaries, and their declarations have been removed from from <stdio.h>. They are exported solely as compatibility symbols to support old binaries. All programs should use strerror or strerror_r instead. Their usage should be removed from libldap (include/ac/errno.h) and replaced with strerror or strerror_r. Otherwise any library that uses libldap compiled with libc < 2.32 won't run on systems that use newer libc versions (>= 2.32). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 19

[Issue 9346] New: test063 only supports 2 servers, should handle up to 9
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9346 Issue ID: 9346 Summary: test063 only supports 2 servers, should handle up to 9 Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.52 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- And the default should be 4, as with test050 etc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 9344] New: test067-tls fails on solaris 10 due to unescaped quotes in quoted string
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9344 Issue ID: 9344 Summary: test067-tls fails on solaris 10 due to unescaped quotes in quoted string Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- This statement in test067 causes it to fail in solaris 10: TLS_PEERKEY_HASHED_FAIL="$TLS_PEERKEY_HASHALG:`echo "a fake key to hash" | \ "${openssl}" dgst "-$TLS_PEERKEY_HASHALG" -binary 2>/dev/null | \ "${openssl}" enc -base64 2>/dev/null`" Solaris10's shell requires the quotes here to be escaped, like: TLS_PEERKEY_HASHED_FAIL="$TLS_PEERKEY_HASHALG:`echo \"a fake key to hash\" | \ "${openssl}" dgst "-$TLS_PEERKEY_HASHALG" -binary 2>/dev/null | \ "${openssl}" enc -base64 2>/dev/null`" With this change the test passes -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 9335] New: test068 fails when openldap is built without SASL support
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9335 Issue ID: 9335 Summary: test068 fails when openldap is built without SASL support Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Need to fix test068 to test for SASL support. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 9333] New: Delete TIMING variable from test suite
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9333 Issue ID: 9333 Summary: Delete TIMING variable from test suite Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- The TIMING variable used in the test suite was introduced in OpenLDAP 2.0 for the "bdb2" backend which hasn't existed in decades. The elapsed time data that is generated in 2.5 supersedes this functionality as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 9311] New: Singular overlays should be flagged as such
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9311 Issue ID: 9311 Summary: Singular overlays should be flagged as such Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.51 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- After the fix for issue#9309 it is now possible to ensure the singularity of overlays that should only be instantiated once on a DB. Currently only two are marked this way: ppolicy and rwm. The following overlays should also be marked this way: auditlog autoca collect constraint dds deref dyngroup dynlist seqmod sssvlv syncprov unique valsort The following overlays it is valid to have multiple instances: accesslog memberOf pcache refint retcode translucent The contrib overlays need examining as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9307] New: --enable-<option>=mod should require --enable-modules
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9307 Issue ID: 9307 Summary: --enable-<option>=mod should require --enable-modules Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ryan(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- In master/RE25, ./configure --enable-backends=mod fails with: checking configure arguments... configure: error: slapd requires a backend if --enable-modules is not also specified. In RE24, and for overlays in both versions, the specified modules get switched to static automatically, and a warning is emitted for each: configure: WARNING: building static accesslog overlay The behaviour was changed in issue 8224; the idea was to have it fail earlier if neither loadable module support nor any static backend was selected, but the error is not clear enough. Quanah and I agreed that it would be better to fail with an explicit error message in this case, rather than automatically do something different than requested. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

← Newer
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
31
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs September 2020