Full_Name: Tianyin Xu
Version: 2.4.33
OS: Ubuntu 12.04 (actually doesn't matter)
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (2607:f720:1300:1241:590b:49c:889f:7b21)
Hi, all,
I suggest to make the verbosity upon changing users' configuration settings,
especially some of the configuration specifications are not written in the
manpage. It's too strong to assume that all the users carefully read the source
code. This can save users' time to diagnose why slapd does not behave as their
expectation.
This ITS is for the "index_intlen" directive.
---------- What the manpage says ----------
index_intlen <integer>
Specify the key length for ordered integer indices. The most
significant bytes of the binary integer will be used for index
keys. The default value is 4, which provides exact indexing for
31 bit values. A floating point representation is used to index
too large values.
------------------------------------------------------
Actually, 4 is not only the default value but also the minimum value. From the
source code, I knew the index_intlen is with the data range [4, 255]. Any
out-of-range value will be converted to the boundaries without notifying users.
Here's the patch I proposed:
--- ../openldap-2.4.33/servers/slapd/bconfig.c 2012-10-10
05:18:49.000000000 -0700
+++ servers/slapd/bconfig.c 2012-11-16 14:10:40.111362005 -0800
@@ -1754,10 +1754,16 @@
break;
case CFG_IX_INTLEN:
- if ( c->value_int < SLAP_INDEX_INTLEN_DEFAULT )
+ if ( c->value_int < SLAP_INDEX_INTLEN_DEFAULT ) {
+ snprintf( c->cr_msg, sizeof(c->cr_msg),
"index_intlen=%d smaller than minimum value %d --> auto convert to the
minimum.", c->value_int, SLAP_INDEX_INTLEN_DEFAULT);
+ Debug(LDAP_DEBUG_ANY, "%s: %s.\n", c->log,
c->cr_msg, 0);
c->value_int = SLAP_INDEX_INTLEN_DEFAULT;
- else if ( c->value_int > 255 )
+ }
+ else if ( c->value_int > 255 ) {
+ snprintf( c->cr_msg, sizeof(c->cr_msg),
"index_intlen=%d larger than maximum value 255 --> auto convert to the
maximum.", c->value_int);
+ Debug(LDAP_DEBUG_ANY, "%s: %s.\n", c->log,
c->cr_msg, 0);
c->value_int = 255;
+ }
index_intlen = c->value_int;
index_intlen_strlen = SLAP_INDEX_INTLEN_STRLEN(
index_intlen );
I just uploaded a slightly updated patch to:
ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/rhafer-20121116-Use-non-blocking-IO-during-…
The code is now only enabled when LDAP_USE_NON_BLOCKING_TLS is defined. Mainly
because NSS and GNUTLS show some issues with not-blocking sockets. See my mail
on -devel. Additionally the non-blocking handshake is only done if
LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT is set. Previously I used LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT but IMO
LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT is the better choice.
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 05:36:54PM +0000, rhafer(a)suse.de wrote:
> I've just uploaded:
>
> ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/rhafer-Use-non-blocking-IO-during-SSL-Hands…
>
[..]
Ralf
--On Friday, November 16, 2012 12:17 AM +0000 beni.anil(a)gmail.com wrote:
> Please let me know if i am going wrong.
As I already told you. Use the openldap-technical mailing list. This ITS
will be closed, again.
<http://www.openldap.org/lists/mm/listinfo/openldap-technical>
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
--On Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:27 PM +0000 beni.anil(a)gmail.com wrote:
> Full_Name:
> Version: 2.4.20
> OS: RHEL 6.3
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (14.140.116.135)
The ITS system is for filing bug reports. For configuration issues such as
yours, please use the openldap-technical mailing list.
I will note that your reported version of OpenLDAP is extremely old.
Although this may be unrelated to the issue you are facing, you would be
well served to use something current.
This ITS will be closed.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Sr. Member of Technical Staff
Zimbra, Inc
A Division of VMware, Inc.
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Michael Ströder wrote:
> Jan Synacek wrote:
>> On 11/08/2012 08:14 AM, michael(a)stroeder.com wrote:
>>> FYI: I sent output of bt full to Jan with some data stripped because of
>>> privacy concerns.
>>>
>>> Note that the entry for which constraint checking is done is added to the
>>> database. So something might be wrong *after* the check.
>>
>> Can you please try the attached patch?
>
> It seems to work. But I will test it during the next days more thoroughly.
No more seg faults so far in my setup which uses slapo-constraints quite
heavily. So I'd appreciate if Jan's patch lands in RE24 branch.
Ciao, Michael.