<quote who="Craig Squires">
> More docs. Great! I notice, however, that in the config for the replica
> there is a difference between this and the directives used in the tests:
>
> http://www.openldap.org/devel/cvsweb.cgi/tests/data/slapd-deltasync-
> slave.conf?hideattic=1&sortbydate=0
>
> There, the directive "overlay syncprov" is also included. Is the latter
> necessary?
It shouldn't be there for a consumer/replica, but test043 fails if it's not.
Anyone explain why?
Thanks.
<quote who="Quanah Gibson-Mount">
> --On Monday, April 21, 2008 7:34 AM +0000 ghenry(a)OpenLDAP.org wrote:
>
>> Full_Name: Gavin Henry
>> Version: HEAD
>> OS:
>> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
>> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85)
>> Submitted by: ghenry
>>
>>
>> Marty and Matthew from Symas have given permission to use how we see
>> fit:
>>
>> http://www.connexitor.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=18
>>
>> This is a ticket to track commits for the delta-sycnrepl sections.
>
> I give my permission too, since I wrote a chunk of it.
>
Thanks.
Full_Name: Marian Eichholz
Version: HEAD-20080411
OS: linux 2.6.23.13
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (194.97.7.65)
Like in ITS#5371 we again missed two object deletions, approx. 4 minutes after
provider and consumer were restarted (after stopped for a slapcat). This is too
bad, because the cvs source from 20080411 at least is far more robust in terms
of connection management than the release of openldap-2.4.8 (see ITS#5463)
We now had full debug log on (any), and as far as I can see there is no obvious
rejections or any other reason, why this deletions were not replicated to the
two consumers. There were heading and trailing deletions in the same second, and
I cannot see structural anomalies in the residual objects.
The consumer databases were cloned from the provider after the incident that
lead to ITS#5371. When we checked the consistency on Friday morning, the
databases were identical, measured by the set of "dn:"-records in the dump. Of
course we first stopped the provider, then the consumers. When we (re-) start
the LDAP services, we first start the provider, then the consumers.
Any idea how we can debug the problem or can get a realiable release?
When needed and useful, I can provide a (heavily edited, for privacy reasons)
excerpt from the debug log of the given second.
Thank You in advance! - Marian Eichholz
--On Monday, April 21, 2008 7:34 AM +0000 ghenry(a)OpenLDAP.org wrote:
> Full_Name: Gavin Henry
> Version: HEAD
> OS:
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85)
> Submitted by: ghenry
>
>
> Marty and Matthew from Symas have given permission to use how we see fit:
>
> http://www.connexitor.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=18
>
> This is a ticket to track commits for the delta-sycnrepl sections.
I give my permission too, since I wrote a chunk of it.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Engineer
Zimbra, Inc
--------------------
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
More docs. Great! I notice, however, that in the config for the replica
there is a difference between this and the directives used in the tests:
http://www.openldap.org/devel/cvsweb.cgi/tests/data/slapd-deltasync-
slave.conf?hideattic=1&sortbydate=0
There, the directive "overlay syncprov" is also included. Is the latter
necessary?
Cheers, Craig
On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 07:34 +0000, ghenry(a)openldap.org wrote:
> Full_Name: Gavin Henry
> Version: HEAD
> OS:
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (212.159.59.85)
> Submitted by: ghenry
>
>
> Marty and Matthew from Symas have given permission to use how we see fit:
>
> http://www.connexitor.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=18
>
> This is a ticket to track commits for the delta-sycnrepl sections.
>
>
Full_Name: Emmanuel Duru
Version: 2.3.38
OS: Windows
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (195.68.44.148)
Using OpenLDAP LDAP library to perform conversions between X.500 directory data
and LDAP directory data, I need to convert values from T.61 to UTF-8.
I see that there is a t61.c file in LDAP library with a ldap_t61s_to_utf8s()
function to perform this.
The problem is that t61.c does not compile because it refers to
ldap_x_wc_to_utf8() and ldap_x_utf8_to_wc() which are defined in utf-8-conv.c
file only in case sizeof(wchar_t) >= 4, which is not the case with windows where
sizeof(wchar_t) = 2.