openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20963 discussions

Re: (ITS#7557) error in configuring openldap
by quanah＠zimbra.com 02 Apr '13

02 Apr '13

--On Tuesday, April 02, 2013 10:48 PM +0000 amanbista(a)gmail.com wrote: > Full_Name: amanbista > Version: 2.3.34 > OS: redhat linux 6.4 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (70.122.251.187) I suggest you read the manual page for ldapsearch so you understand how it works. I would also note that the OpenLDAP 2.3 series has not been supported for years. --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

1 0

(ITS#7557) error in configuring openldap
by amanbista＠gmail.com 02 Apr '13

02 Apr '13

Full_Name: amanbista Version: 2.3.34 OS: redhat linux 6.4 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (70.122.251.187) root@scrdcvcortst05 openldap]# slaptest bdb_db_open: warning - no DB_CONFIG file found in directory /var/lib/ldap: (2). Expect poor performance for suffix "dc=my-domain,dc=com". config file testing succeeded [root@scrdcvcortst05 openldap]# ldapsearch SASL/GSSAPI authentication started ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Local error (-2) additional info: SASL(-1): generic failure: GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Credentials cache file '/tmp/krb5cc_0' not found)

1 0

Re: (ITS#7556) MDB_PREV skipping large chunks of databse
by dw＠botanicus.net 01 Apr '13

01 Apr '13

--089e0122814257375004d955a1e6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 It's worth note this was found after applying Howard's most recent patch for my previous MDB_LAST issue. Sorry for being a pain. :) --089e0122814257375004d955a1e6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 <div dir="ltr">It's worth note this was found after applying Howard's most recent patch for my previous MDB_LAST issue. Sorry for being a pain. :)<br></div> --089e0122814257375004d955a1e6--

1 0

(ITS#7556) MDB_PREV skipping large chunks of databse
by dw＠botanicus.net 01 Apr '13

01 Apr '13

Full_Name: David Wilson Version: MDB 7aae15739b2c77bb601c98b112c804f51778a33b OS: OS X URL: http://codepad.org/KCeSzRr6 Submission from: (NULL) (92.41.251.234) Per demo at http://codepad.org/KCeSzRr6 , something seems to be broken with reverse cursor iteration. Iteration mostly succeeds before skipping most of the middle of the database and continuing with the starting keys (as best I can read it).

1 0

Re: (ITS#7555) SizeLimit Exceeded Error
by masarati＠aero.polimi.it 01 Apr '13

01 Apr '13

> Full_Name: sandeep kumawat > Version: 2.4 > OS: Cent OS 5.6 > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (103.245.47.20) > > > When doing a page search for user on ldap, SizeLimit Exceeded Error is > thrown. > > There are about 1500 users in ldap and we are using ldap_search_init_page > API > with 10th param (TotalSizeLimit) set to 500. > > Could you pls let us know what can be issue here. The ITS is to notify bugs in OpenLDAP software. There is no ldap_search_init_page() in OpenLDAP's API. The answer to your question is in slapd.conf(5) in the discussion of the "limits" parameter. This ITS will be closed. -- Pierangelo Masarati Associate Professor Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali Politecnico di Milano

1 0

(ITS#7555) SizeLimit Exceeded Error
by sandeep_kumawat＠mcafee.com 01 Apr '13

01 Apr '13

Full_Name: sandeep kumawat Version: 2.4 OS: Cent OS 5.6 URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (103.245.47.20) When doing a page search for user on ldap, SizeLimit Exceeded Error is thrown. There are about 1500 users in ldap and we are using ldap_search_init_page API with 10th param (TotalSizeLimit) set to 500. Could you pls let us know what can be issue here. Thanks

1 0

Re: (ITS#7531) Syncrepl push delete operation does not recover when slave is unavailable
by quanah＠zimbra.com 27 Mar '13

27 Mar '13

--On Wednesday, March 27, 2013 8:42 AM +0000 hans.moser(a)ofd-z.niedersachsen.de wrote: >> Sorry, I was in test054, not test045. But as base 054 seems to be just >> fine. I hope, I did the patch right. > Hm, I was not included. :( > Is there something wrong with the patch? Hi Marc, Simply an oversight, sorry. I've patched test054 with your bits on my local install, on a 2.4.34 build without the fix for ITS#7531, and it passes for me. I would assume since I haven't patched 2.4.34 for the fix, it should fail? I.e., it seems this patch doesn't actually catch the problem. :/ --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

1 0

Re: (ITS#7531) Syncrepl push delete operation does not recover when slave is unavailable
by hans.moser＠ofd-z.niedersachsen.de 27 Mar '13

27 Mar '13

Hi, hans.moser(a)ofd-z.niedersachsen.de schrieb (14.03.2013 17:22 Uhr): > hyc(a)symas.com schrieb (14.03.2013 16:24 Uhr): >> Marc Patermann wrote: >>> hyc(a)symas.com schrieb (14.03.2013 15:14 Uhr): >>>> hans.moser(a)ofd-z.niedersachsen.de wrote: >>>>> I think we had situations like this before... >>>>> >>>>> How about having a test for this? >>>>> What is the test which is nearest to this situation where a test could >>>>> be based on? >>>> test045. Feel free to submit patches for this test script. >>> If I'm not mistaken, >>> - in lines 262-264 the consumer is stopped >>> - in lines 266-284 changes are made to the provider >>> - in lines 286-294 the consumer is started again. >> Sounds reasonable but your line numbers don't match anything in our tree. >> Please send an actual patch, e.g. from git format-patch (or just diff -u.) > Sorry, I was in test054, not test045. But as base 054 seems to be just fine. > I hope, I did the patch right. Hm, I was not included. :( Is there something wrong with the patch? Marc

1 0

RE: (ITS#7545) Problem with v2.4.30
by quanah＠zimbra.com 26 Mar '13

26 Mar '13

--On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 7:45 PM +0000 "Swenson_CNTR, Carl E." <Carl.Swenson(a)dodiis.mil> wrote: > All, > > Thank you for the replies. Yes, Oracle makes the hardware, but as you > may have experienced when dealing with Oracle, if there is anything on > the server that is not "Oracle", then the problem must be with that > software. (This is the response you will get from Oracle on just about > anything). BDB is owned by Oracle, so they should be able to help you with it. The creation of the BDB log files is *purely* a function internal to BDB. The fact that they are exploding would be a function of BDB. That is why I've repeatedly said there is no indication of an OpenLDAP bug here. That is why Howard directed you to Oracle. They are the ones who own BDB, they should be able to provide you insight into why it has broken on your new server. BDB logs are created when changes are made to the database. If you see your logs "exploding" without corresponding massive changes being made to the OpenLDAP server, then you are essentially ensured that the issue is with BDB. I would also suggest you run the db_archive utility to see what log(s) it says can or can't be archived. It is possible that BDB is holding open a write or read transaction for some reason (again, a BDB bug). As for MDB, it is a new database written by Howard Chu, the primary OpenLDAP Developer. You can read up on it at <http://symas.com/mdb/>. It is significantly better than BDB in numerous ways. I disagree with your assessment on the recent change log as well. It is almost all entirely around mdb. OpenLDAP 2.4.34 Release (2013/03/03) Fixed liblmdb mdb_env_open flag handling (ITS#7453) Fixed liblmdb mdb_midl_sort array optimization (ITS#7432) Fixed liblmdb freelist with large entries (ITS#7455) Fixed liblmdb to check for filled dirty page list (ITS#7491) Fixed liblmdb to validate data limits (ITS#7485) Fixed liblmdb mdb_update_key for large keys (ITS#7505) Fixed slapd-mdb to reopen attr DBs after env reopen (ITS#7416) Fixed slapd-mdb handling of missing entries (ITS#7483,7496) Fixed slapd-mdb environment flag setting (ITS#7452) Fixed slapd-mdb with sub db slapcat (ITS#7469) Fixed slapd-mdb to correctly work with toolthreads > 2 (ITS#7488,ITS#7527) Fixed slapd-mdb subtree search speed (ITS#7473) I see zero changes in 2.4.34 related to BDB at all. OpenLDAP 2.4.33 Release (2012/10/10) Fixed liblmdb POSIX semaphore cleanup on environment close (ITS#7364) Fixed liblmdb mdb_page_split (ITS#7385, ITS#7229) Fixed slapd-mdb slapadd -q -w double free (ITS#7356) Fixed slapd-mdb to close read txn in reindex commit (ITS#7386) Again, no changes related to BDB. The last release with any fixes specific to BDB was 2.4.32. --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

1 0

RE: (ITS#7545) Problem with v2.4.30
by Carl.Swenson＠dodiis.mil 26 Mar '13

26 Mar '13

All, Thank you for the replies. Yes, Oracle makes the hardware, but as you may have experienced when dealing with Oracle, if there is anything on the server that is not "Oracle", then the problem must be with that software. (This is the response you will get from Oracle on just about anything). We have many security layers, and an "isolated network" that has zero chance of getting to the internet / outside world that is of very little risk from malware. It is true we have never had to compile the packages being used so the install defaults referred to BDB, and that is what we used. I realize BDB 4.7.25.NC may not be the "bleeding edge" but it is the release referred to on sunfreeware.com (they have v2.4.32 packaged for download), and when you look on OpenLDAP's web site there are references to get the compiled packages from sunfreeware.com. I see on Oracle's web site there is a v5.3 download that can try. As far as "mdb" goes, we don't know what that is, and most references even in the v2.4.34 download talk about BDB. The purpose we use OpenLDAP for is a very simple authentication with WebLogic. Nothing heavy duty. I agree there could be some "strangeness" when mixing these packages with a new T4, but it is still unknown. Quanah, "There certainly isn't enough detail in your report to really offer you any particular direction to pursue." What is it that would be useful, if I can capture it, and "secure" transfer it then I will. But I can't get most detail reports through security de-class scan to be able to post it. Carl =========== Well... Oracle now owns your hardware manufacturer and the software in question. They'd be the obvious place to ask for help. Frankly I'm surprised that a military site on a classified network is allowed to install freeware binaries from any internet site. You have no idea how those binaries were built, and certainly no recourse if they fail in any way or happen to have trojans/malware embedded within. My first step would be to compile current source code. If the behavior still exists on current code, then start debugging/diagnosing. BDB 4.7.25 is quite old, as Quanah already pointed out. We've never seen any other cases reported like this, but it's always possible for a mixture of old binaries and new hardware to go bad. For all you know it's an instruction set incompatibility and recompiling BDB for your T4 will make it go away. > > > Carl > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Quanah Gibson-Mount [mailto:quanah@zimbra.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 2:20 PM > To: Swenson_CNTR, Carl E.; openldap-its(a)openldap.org > Subject: RE: (ITS#7545) Problem with v2.4.30 > > --On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 8:57 PM +0000 "Swenson_CNTR, Carl E." > <Carl.Swenson(a)dodiis.mil> wrote: > >> Quanah, >> >> Thank you for the reply. >> >> I double checked my versions on some of my systems just to be sure. >> One inconsistency I noticed was in the name of the DB package >> Possibly downloaded at 2 different times from sunfreeware.com. >> >> Example - >> Sun Enterprise SPARC T5220 (everything works on this system) pkginfo >> -l SMColdap - version 2.4.30 pkginfo -l SMCossl - version 1.0.1c >> pkginfo -l SMCdb - version 4.7.25.NC >> >> Sun Enterprise SPARC T4-1 (the logs go crazy on this system) pkginfo >> -l SMColdap - version 2.4.30 pkginfo -l SMCossl - version 1.0.1c >> pkginfo -l SMCdb47 - version 4.7.25.NC >> >> IDK how this would affect the system, but based on your suggestion >> there is some difference in the package as the "pkginst" name on one >> system is SMCdb, and SMCdb47 on the other while the version is exactly the same. > > I have no idea. I abandoned Slowaris years ago... I abandoned using BDB with OpenLDAP last year. However, no one has reported any issues like this. It really appears to be a bug in BDB rather than OpenLDAP however. > > --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 > > > -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

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