openldap-bugs June 2023

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

2 participants
134 discussions

[Issue 10054] New: Value size limited to 2,147,479,552 bytes
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Jun '23

12 Jun '23

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10054 Issue ID: 10054 Summary: Value size limited to 2,147,479,552 bytes Product: LMDB Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: louis(a)meilisearch.com Target Milestone: --- Hello, According to the documentation[0], a database that is not using `MDB_DUPSORT` can store values up to `0xffffffff` bytes (around 4GB). In practice, under Linux, the actual limit is `0x7ffff000` though (2^31 - 4096, so around 2GB). This is due to the write loop in `mdb_page_flush`. The `wsize` value determining how many bytes will be written can be as big as `4096*dp->mp_pages`[1], and the number of overflow pages grows with the size of the value put inside the DB. The `wsize` is not split in smaller chunks in the case where there are many overflow pages to write, and as a result the call to `pwrite`[2] does not perform a full write, but only a "short" write of 2147479552 bytes (the maximum allowed on a call to `pwrite` on Linux[3]). This would be OK if the short write condition was handled by looping and performing another `pwrite` with the rest of the data, but instead `EIO` is returned[4]. There seems to be a related, but different issue on macOS when trying to `pwrite` more the 2^31 bytes, that was already reported[5]. This issue was reported to me by a Meilisearch user because it causes their database indexing to fail[6]. I had to investigate a bit because their setup was peculiar (high number of documents in their database) and the `EIO` error code is not very descriptive of the underlying issue. I join a C reproducer of the issue that attempts to add a 2147479553 bytes value to the DB and fails with `EIO` (decreasing `nb_items` to a smaller value such as `2107479552` does succeed)[7]. Thank you for making LMDB! Louis Dureuil. [0]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/lmdb.h#LL284… [1]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c#LL3770… [2]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c#L3820 [3]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70368651/why-cant-linux-write-more-than… [4]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c#L3840 [5]: https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9736 [6]: https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3654 [7]: https://github.com/dureuill/lmdb_3654/tree/main -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 10062] New: How to store a data item of length greater than 511 in a dupsort db
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Jun '23

12 Jun '23

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10062 Issue ID: 10062 Summary: How to store a data item of length greater than 511 in a dupsort db Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.30 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: mega.alpha100(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Is there a workaround to storing a data item with a length greater than the value of `fn mdb_env_get_maxkeysize()` or 511 in a dupsort db? Also, I tried to change the value of the `MDB_MAXKEYSIZE` macro but that led to an illegal instruction -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

[Issue 10050] New: Use of stack allocated string in mdb_strerror
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Jun '23

12 Jun '23

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10050 Issue ID: 10050 Summary: Use of stack allocated string in mdb_strerror Product: LMDB Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: Windows Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: es(a)m-labs.hk Target Milestone: --- https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/mdb.master/libraries/libl… This piece of code exists from 2014, and these lines are not working outside of MSVC. Moreover, they lead to segfaults in MINGW compiled environments. Please see the patch we use for potential fix: https://github.com/msys2/MINGW-packages/blob/31012dd33a32390d1e5f9b93388799… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 10061] New: Query on setting TLSVerifyClient option set to demand
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Jun '23

12 Jun '23

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10061 Issue ID: 10061 Summary: Query on setting TLSVerifyClient option set to demand Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ramajay52(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Dear Experts, In my case, I had set TLSVerifyClient to demand. I couldn't be able to establish a connection While providing TLSCACertificateFile alone. While setting the TLSVerifyClient option demand is it mandatory to provide the following option? 1. TLSCACertificateFile 2. TLSCertificateKeyFile 3. TLSCertificateFile Regards, Ram -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

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 June 2023