https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10279
Issue ID: 10279
Summary: add debug notice also to client tools
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: client tools
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: rossi.f(a)inwind.it
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 1040
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1040&action=edit
openldap-2.6.4-debug-notice.patch
The command line -d option, when used for debugging, does nothing if openldap
was not compiled byth --enable-debug option. For the server part there is a
notice to the user regarding this, I propose to add the same also to client
tools.
Here is attached the simple patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10163
Issue ID: 10163
Summary: Cleanup configure/test integration
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.6
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
The sed commandline configure uses to perform substitutions is getting unwieldy
and may be exceeding platform limits on various systems.
All of the BUILD_xxx substitutions for overlays are only used in tests/run.in.
They could be completely removed, and instead each of the enabled overlays
could be emitted into a separate file that just gets included by the test
scripts. There's no need for them to be part of the sed invocation at all.
There's also leftover BUILD_xxx cruft from backends that we've removed (e.g.
back-shell BUILD_SHELL) that nothing else in the tree references any more.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10266
Issue ID: 10266
Summary: Adopt broader RFC4511 NoD interpretation on lloadd's
client side
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: lloadd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Server side, lloadd has long implemented a broad interpretation of NoD
unsolicited response handling: when the message is issued, no new requests are
accepted on the session however the client and server are both free to keep the
session open if there are any operations that have not resolved yet. The server
is still expected to close the connection as soon as no operations are still
pending.
This seems to interoperate with known clients. Those that want to will close
the session immediately, unaware of this possibility, those that also want to
interpret RFC 4511 this way can choose to wait for existing operations to
resolve.
This ticket is to track the lloadd's implementation of the client side of this
- when receiving a NoD message, we don't close the connection
immediately+unconditionally either but are willing to wait.
Related functionality:
- if connection was a bind connection processing a multi-stage SASL bind, the
bind should fail if/when the client attempts to progress it
- clients assigned to this connection through coherence at least 'connection'
are also marked closing
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10024
Issue ID: 10024
Summary: MDB_PREVSNAPSHOT broken
Product: LMDB
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: markus(a)objectbox.io
Target Milestone: ---
It seems that the patch #9496 had a negative side effect on MDB_PREVSNAPSHOT.
In certain cases, when opening the DB using MDB_PREVSNAPSHOT, the previous (2nd
latest) commit is not selected. Instead, reads show that the latest commit was
selected voiding the effect of MDB_PREVSNAPSHOT.
I observed this in our test cases a while back. Today, I was finally able to
reproduce it and debug into it.
When creating the transaction to read the data, I debugged into mdb_txn_renew0.
Here, ti (MDB_txninfo; env->me_txns) was non-NULL. However, ti->mti_txnid was 0
(!) and thus txn->mt_txnid was set to 0. That's the reason for always selecting
the first (index 0) meta page inside mdb_txn_renew0:
meta = env->me_metas[txn->mt_txnid & 1];
This line occurs twice (once for read txn and once for write txn; it affects
both txn types).
Thus, the chances of MDB_PREVSNAPSHOT selecting the correct meta page is 50-50.
It's only correct if the first meta page (index 0) is the older one.
I believe that this is related to #9496 because the patch, that was provided
there, removed the initialization of "env->me_txns->mti_txnid" in
mdb_env_open2. This would explain why txn->mt_txnid inside mdb_txn_renew0 was
set to 0.
I can confirm that adding back the following two lines back in fixes
MDB_PREVSNAPSHOT:
if (env->me_txns)
env->me_txns->mti_txnid = meta.mm_txnid;
The said patch including the removal of these two lines was applied in the
commit(s) "ITS#9496 fix mdb_env_open bug from #8704" (Howard Chu on 09.04.21).
I hope this information is useful to find a suitable fix. Please let me know if
you have questions. Also, I'd be happy to help confirming a potential fix with
our test suite.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10265
Issue ID: 10265
Summary: Make it possible to change olcBkLloadListen at runtime
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: lloadd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Currently, olcBkLloadListen changes only take effect on lloadd startup:
- an added olcBkLloadListen should come online at the end of the modify
operation
- at the end of the modify operation a removed olcBkLloadListen will stop
listening on the sockets associated with it, clients that connected over these
are marked CLOSING
- to facilitate replacing a value where URIs resolved sockets overlap,
olcBkLloadListen should become a MAY in olcBkLloadConfig objectclass
Lloadd's startup was modelled upon slapd's, but the requirements have changed
considerably when it was turned into a module. Sockets are acquired at module
configuration time, which is much later than standalone/slapd's own startup and
so the way the URLs are handled also needs to be reworked. This will resolve
other related issues.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10056
Issue ID: 10056
Summary: test069-delta-multiprovider-starttls failures on
static builds
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.4
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: kaction(a)disroot.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hello.
I am getting following test error when trying to build `openldap` statically:
```
[nix-shell:/tmp/openldap-static/openldap-2.6.4/tests]$ ./run
test069-delta-multiprovider-starttls
Cleaning up test run directory leftover from previous run.
Running ./scripts/test069-delta-multiprovider-starttls for mdb...
running defines.sh
Initializing server configurations...
Starting server 1 on TCP/IP port 9011...
Using ldapsearch to check that server 1 is running...
Waiting 5 seconds for slapd to start...
Using ldapadd for context on server 1...
Starting server 2 on TCP/IP port 9012...
Using ldapsearch to check that server 2 is running...
Waiting 5 seconds for slapd to start...
Using ldapadd to populate server 1...
Waiting 7 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 1...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 2...
Comparing retrieved entries from server 1 and server 2...
Using ldapadd to populate server 2...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 1...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 2...
Comparing retrieved entries from server 1 and server 2...
Breaking replication between server 1 and 2...
Using ldapmodify to force conflicts between server 1 and 2...
Restoring replication between server 1 and 2...
Waiting 7 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 1...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 2...
Comparing retrieved entries from server 1 and server 2...
test failed - server 1 and server 2 databases differ (561)
```
I added line number (561) into error message to pinpoint it more precisely.
And here is difference between databases:
```
--- /tmp/openldap-static/openldap-2.6.4/tests/testrun/server1.flt
2023-05-23 22:53:51.000965129 -0400
+++ /tmp/openldap-static/openldap-2.6.4/tests/testrun/server2.flt
2023-05-23 22:53:51.005965136 -0400
@@ -289,13 +289,10 @@
userPassword:: amFq
dn: cn=James A Jones 2,ou=Alumni Association,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com
-carLicense: 123-XYZ
cn: James A Jones 2
cn: James Jones
cn: Jim Jones
-description: Amazing
description: Bizarre
-description: Mindboggling
description: Stupendous
employeeNumber: 64
employeeType: deadwood
@@ -307,7 +304,7 @@
pager: +1 313 555 3923
postalAddress: Alumni Association $ 111 Maple St $ Anytown, MI 48109
seeAlso: cn=All Staff,ou=Groups,dc=example,dc=com
-sn: Surname
+sn: Jones
telephoneNumber: +1 313 555 0895
title: Mad Cow Researcher, UM Alumni Association
uid: jaj
```
Suggestions on what more information I can provide are welcome. You can also
try to build `pkgsStatic.openldap` in this nixpkgs
[commit](f9e32f61282275eb5fa9064e08bbd0a92d1187de)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9245
Bug ID: 9245
Summary: devel/programming needs rewrite
Product: website
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: website
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
The information on the devel/programming web page is at least a decade out of
date and needs a complete overhaul.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10084
Issue ID: 10084
Summary: Move away from DIGEST-MD5 as a default in the test
suite
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: test suite
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
cyrus-sasl seem on the verge or removing the DIGEST-MD5 mechanism from 2.2
onwards. As such we should update our defaults in a couple of our test scripts
for master/2.7 at least. Are SCRAM mechanisms the go-to these days?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10289
Issue ID: 10289
Summary: myldap
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: cmp(a)tutanota.de
Target Milestone: ---
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10275
Issue ID: 10275
Summary: mdb_load could use a parameter to pass batch size
Product: LMDB
Version: 0.9.21
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: tools
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: gkwicker(a)amazon.com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 1037
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1037&action=edit
Patch to mdb_load.c in version 0.9.21
mdb_load is very slow when ingesting a large db. The attached patch (0.9.21
but will apply to other versions with modification) allows the user to pass a
batch size to be used instead of the default value of 100. Changing the batch
size to a larger value improves ingestion speed.
I, Gary Wicker, 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.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.