openldap-bugs March 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
136 discussions

[Issue 9736] New: pwrite bug in OSX breaking LMDB promise about the maximum value size
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 15 Apr '26

15 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9736 Issue ID: 9736 Summary: pwrite bug in OSX breaking LMDB promise about the maximum value size Product: LMDB Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: Mac OS Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: renault.cle(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Hi, I was working with LMDB and found an issue when trying to write a value of approximately 3.3GiB in the database, I dive into the LMDB source code of the mdb_put method using the lldb debugger and found out that it was not related to an issue in LMDB itself but rather a bug in the pwrite function of the Mac OS libc implementation. The pwrite function is given four parameters, the file descriptor, the buffer, the count of bytes to write from the buffer and, the offset of where to write it in the file. On Mac OS the count of bytes is a size_t that must be a 64bits unsigned integer but when you call pwrite with a number bigger or equal to 2^31 it returns an error 22 (invalid argument). LMDB was returning a 22 error from the mdb_put call and not an EINVAL because the error was cause by an internal issue and not something catchable by LMDB. I am not sure about what we can do, can we implement this single pwrite [1] as multiple pwrite with counts smaller than 2^31 in a loop, just for Mac OS? Like for Windows where we do specific things for this operating system too? I also found this issue on the RocksDB repository [2] about a similar problem they have with pwrite and write on Mac OS it seems. I understand that this is not a real promise that LMDB is specifying but rather an "in theory" rule [3]. Thank you for your time, kero [1]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/01b1b7dc204abdf3849536979205dc9e3a0e3ece/… [2]: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/issues/5169 [3]: http://www.lmdb.tech/doc/group__mdb.html#structMDB__val -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10054] New: Value size limited to 2,147,479,552 bytes
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 15 Apr '26

15 Apr '26

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 5

[Issue 10050] New: Use of stack allocated string in mdb_strerror
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 15 Apr '26

15 Apr '26

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 4

[Issue 10274] New: Replication issue on MMR configuration
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Apr '26

14 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10274 Issue ID: 10274 Summary: Replication issue on MMR configuration Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.14 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: falgon.comp(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1036 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1036&action=edit In this attachment you will find 2 openldap configurations for 2 instances + slamd conf exemple + 5 screenshots to show the issue and one text file to explain what you see Hello we are openning this issue further to the initial post in technical : https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/… Issue : We are working on a project and we've come across an issue with the replication after performance testing : *Configuration :* RHEL 8.6 OpenLDAP 2.5.14 *MMR-delta *configuration on multiple servers attached 300,000 users configured and used for tests *olcLastBind: TRUE* Use of SLAMD (performance shooting) *Problem description:* We are currently running performance and resilience tests on our infrastructure using the SLAMD tool configured to perform BINDs and MODs on a defined range of accounts. We use a load balancer (VIP) to poll all of our servers equally. (but it is possible to do performance tests directly on each of the directories) With our current infrastructure we're able to perform approximately 300 MOD/BIND/s. Beyond that, we start to generate delays and can randomly come across one issue. However, when we run performance tests that exceed our write capacity, our replication between servers can randomly create an incident with directories being unable to catch up with their replication delay. The directories update their contextCSNs, but extremely slowly (like freezing). From then on, it's impossible for the directories to catch again. (even with no incoming traffic) A restart of the instance is required to perform a full refresh and solve the incident. We have enabled synchronization logs and have no error or refresh logs to indicate a problem ( we can provide you with logs if necessary). We suspect a write collision or a replication conflict but this is never write in our sync logs. We've run a lot of tests. For example, when we run a performance test on a single live server, we don't reproduce the problem. Anothers examples: if we define different accounts ranges for each server with SALMD, we don't reproduce the problem either. If we use only one account for the range, we don't reproduce the problem either. ______________________________________________________________________ I have add some screenshots on attachement to show you the issue and all the explanations. ______________________________________________________________________ *Symptoms :* One or more directories can no longer be replicated normally after performance testing ends. No apparent error logs. Need a restart of instances to solve the problem. *How to reproduce the problem:* Have at least two servers in MMR mode Set LastBind to TRUE Perform a SLAMD shot from a LoadBalancer in bandwidth mode OR start multiple SLAMD test on same time for each server with the same account range. Exceed the maximum write capacity of the servers. *SLAMD configuration :* authrate.sh --hostname ${HOSTNAME} --port ${PORTSSL} \ --useSSL --trustStorePath ${CACERTJKS} \ --trustStorePassword ${CACERTJKSPW} --bindDN "${BINDDN}" \ --bindPassword ${BINDPW} --baseDN "${BASEDN}" \ --filter "(uid=[${RANGE}])" --credentials ${USERPW} \ --warmUpIntervals ${WARMUP} \ --numThreads ${NTHREADS} ${ARGS} -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 21

[Issue 10280] New: Combining positive & negated filters doesn't work with dynlist
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 13 Apr '26

13 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10280 Issue ID: 10280 Summary: Combining positive & negated filters doesn't work with dynlist Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.18 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: code(a)pipoprods.org Target Milestone: --- The directory contains 3 users & 2 groups. user1 is in group1, user2 is in group2, user3 isn't is any group. Filter [1] matches users that are either: - member of group1 - member of group2 ✅ It returns user1 & user2 Filter [2] matches user that are: - not member of group1 nor group2 ✅ It returns user3 Filter [3] should match users that are either: - member of group1 - member of group2 - not member of group1 nor group2 ❌ It should return the 3 users but only returns users matched by the first part of the filter (whatever the first part, if we swap both parts we get the complementary search results) Filter [1]: (|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)) Filter [2]: (!(|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com))) Filter [3]: (|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(!(|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)))) Here's my dynlist config: ``` dn: olcOverlay={2}dynlist,olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config objectClass: olcOverlayConfig objectClass: olcDynListConfig olcOverlay: {2}dynlist olcDynListAttrSet: {0}groupOfURLs memberURL member+memberOf@groupOfNames structuralObjectClass: olcDynListConfig entryUUID: 7df8328a-fd72-103e-82df-6fed25d5f6c8 creatorsName: cn=config createTimestamp: 20240902122741Z entryCSN: 20240902122741.257759Z#000000#000#000000 modifiersName: cn=config modifyTimestamp: 20240902122741Z ``` Here's a LDIF to initialise directory contents: ``` dn: ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: organizationalUnit ou: example-groups dn: ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: organizationalUnit ou: example-users dn: uid=user1,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: inetOrgPerson cn: User sn: One uid: user1 dn: uid=user2,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: inetOrgPerson cn: User sn: Two uid: user2 dn: uid=user3,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: inetOrgPerson cn: User sn: Three uid: user3 dn: cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: groupOfNames cn: group1 member: uid=user1,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com dn: cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: groupOfNames cn: group2 member: uid=user2,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com ``` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 7

[Issue 10113] New: make connection debug output more uniform
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 10 Apr '26

10 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10113 Issue ID: 10113 Summary: make connection debug output more uniform Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: enhancement Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Here's what some of the debug output looks like currently: 6529a16e.07884bd6 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=8 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.0788551d 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on 1 descriptor 6529a16e.07885e63 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on:6529a16e.07886607 0x7f7a68dff640 6529a16e.07886f93 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=7 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.07887737 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=8 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.0788987f 0x7f7a63fff640 tls_write: want=239 error=Broken pipe 6529a16e.0788a369 0x7f7a63fff640 TLS trace: SSL_accept:SSLv3/TLS write session ticket 6529a16e.0788d027 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_read(12): unable to get TLS client DN, error=49 id=1000 6529a16e.0788e6cc 0x7f7a63fff640 conn=1000 fd=12 TLS established tls_ssf=128 ssf=128 tls_proto=TLSv1.3 tls_cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 6529a16e.078974a9 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on 2 descriptors 6529a16e.07898cf1 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on:6529a16e.07899409 0x7f7a68dff640 12r6529a16e.07899ef3 0x7f7a68dff640 6529a16e.0789a839 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: read active on 12 6529a16e.0789c1de 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=7 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.0789cd0e 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=8 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.0789d9e0 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on 1 descriptor 6529a16e.0789e36d 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on:6529a16e.0789eaca 0x7f7a68dff640 6529a16e.0789f26e 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=7 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.0789fd9d 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: epoll: listen=8 active_threads=0 tvp=NULL 6529a16e.078a0a70 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_get(12) 6529a16e.078a1ea0 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_get(12): got connid=1000 6529a16e.078a25b8 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_read(12): checking for input on id=1000 6529a16e.078a32d0 0x7f7a63fff640 ber_get_next 6529a16e.078a6a78 0x7f7a63fff640 tls_read: want=5, got=5 6529a16e.078a7d91 0x7f7a63fff640 0000: 30 05 02 01 02 0.... 6529a16e.078aa0c2 0x7f7a63fff640 tls_write: want=24 error=Broken pipe 6529a16e.078aa820 0x7f7a63fff640 ldap_read: want=8 error=Broken pipe 6529a16e.078ab121 0x7f7a63fff640 ber_get_next on fd 12 failed errno=32 (Broken pipe) 6529a16e.078aba67 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_read(12): input error=-2 id=1000, closing. 6529a16e.078ac3ae 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_closing: readying conn=1000 sd=12 for close 6529a16e.078ad0c6 0x7f7a63fff640 connection_close: conn=1000 sd=12 6529a16e.078aed26 0x7f7a63fff640 daemon: removing 12 6529a16e.078b2ffd 0x7f7a68dff640 daemon: activity on 1 descriptor 6529a16e.078b4616 0x7f7a63fff640 conn=1000 fd=12 closed (connection lost) Most operations will be logged with "conn=xxxx fd=yy blah blah" but things like connection_close etc log "blah blah conn=xxxx sd=yy" instead. It would be nice if they all uniformly started with "conn=xxxx fd=yy blah blah" This is a trivial change. Could be a good first-time commit for a new dev. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 9431] New: back-mdb: Always have an equality index for objectClass
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 10 Apr '26

10 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9431 Issue ID: 9431 Summary: back-mdb: Always have an equality index for objectClass 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: --- Data storage backends require an equality index on objectClass to function correctly. As this is a hard requirement it should be automatic with back-mdb. Why this wasn't done in the past with other backends isn't exactly clear, it may have been due to their requirements to have additional cache layers. That however is not necessary with back-mdb. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Bug 9225] New: back-mdb: Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Apr '26

08 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9225 Bug ID: 9225 Summary: back-mdb: Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Add support for PREPARE/2-phase commit in back-mdb -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 12

[Issue 9612] New: Change index_hash64 default to on
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Apr '26

07 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9612 Issue ID: 9612 Summary: Change index_hash64 default to on Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Change the default value of index_hash64. By default this means slapd won't run on a 32-bit CPU (It will continue to work on 32-bit OSes running on 64-bit CPUs). If someone needs to run slapd on a 32-bit CPU they can turn this option off. In the documentation, mark the option as deprecated for eventual removal in a future release. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9343] New: Expand ppolicy policy configuration to allow URL filter
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Apr '26

07 Apr '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9343 Issue ID: 9343 Summary: Expand ppolicy policy configuration to allow URL filter Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Currently, ppolicy only supports a single global default policy, and past that any policies must be manually added to a given user entry if they are supposed to have something other than the default policy. Also, some sites want no default policy, and only a specific subset to have a policy applied to them. For both of these cases, it would be helpful if it were possible to configure a policy to apply to a set of users via a URL similar to the way we handle creating groups of users in dynlist -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 18

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
14
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 March 2025