openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
21001 discussions

Re: (ITS#5471) Object-Deletions (some) missing in syncrepl consumers
by m.d.t.evans＠qmul.ac.uk 18 Apr '08

18 Apr '08

On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 08:34 +0000, marian.eichholz(a)freenet.ag wrote: > Full_Name: Marian Eichholz > Version: HEAD-20080411 > OS: Linux > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (194.97.7.65) > > > When I made a consistency check with our two syncrepl consumers, I found several > irritating differences. > > After the initial refresh cycle, the DNs were complete. But when the consumers > got all new objects after, they now have objects that were deleted on the > provider in the meantime. Unfortunately I cannot tell when that happened to a > specific DN. > The set of undeleted objects is not identically on the two consumers. > So I guess that it is not a problem with the data itself. > > So the consumers are corrupted now. > > Both consumers suffer from hanging replication sessions. This is why we switched > from 2.4.8 to HEAD (11.4.2008, see ITS 5463). They were stopped and restarted > repeatedly, of course. The daemons have never been killed. So the DBD backend > SHOULD be OK. > > Any idea how to find such events in the LOCAL4-Log? I did not apply "any" as > loglevel for predictable performance issues and so liked to keep the entries to > a reasonable volume. > > Thank You very much for any idea. > > Yours sincerely - Marian Eichholz (freenet AG) > > Hi Marion. I saw both those problems with 2.4.8. But they both seem to have been fixed in the RE24 cvs tag as of 14/04/08. I have an arrangement of syncrepl servers based on that release that has been running fine for a few days now with about 10 connections per second on the consumers. Martin. -- -- Dr Martin Evans, Computing Services, Queen Mary

1 0

Re: (ITS#5469) Assertion failure causes slapd crash
by jwm＠horde.net 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 01:20:58PM -0700, Howard Chu wrote: > Howard Chu wrote: > Please try the patch in slapd/connection.c 1.416 and report your results, > thanks. I patched our local slapd yesterday; I'll let you know in a couple of weeks, once we can be certain that slapd is no longer crashing. john -- John Morrissey _o /\ ---- __o jwm(a)horde.net _-< \_ / \ ---- < \, www.horde.net/ __(_)/_(_)________/ \_______(_) /_(_)__

1 0

Re: (ITS#5474) Problem with schema validation in 2.4.8
by benoitde＠sympatico.ca 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

Hi, Thanks a lot guys! I tested the patch with both a dump of an LDIF and the JMSAdmin tool of IBM MQ, and confirm that now the problem is fixed. On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 06:59:10PM +0000, ando(a)sys-net.it wrote: > ando(a)sys-net.it wrote: > > > The problem is that OpenLDAP 2.4 allows to add entries that contain > > ABSTRACT objectClasses, as soon as no non-ABSTRACT class is subtyped > > from them, which is clearly an error. > > > > It all reduces to a missing negation in the ABSTRACT subclassing check, > > resulting in reversing the logic of the test. > > > > Please test servers/slapd/schema_check.c 1.112 -> 1.113 > > I also note that 2.3 suffers from the reverse of the reported issue, > namely an abstract class is tolerated, even if no other class inherits > from it. > > p. > > > > Ing. Pierangelo Masarati > OpenLDAP Core Team > > SysNet s.r.l. > via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA > http://www.sys-net.it > --------------------------------------- > Office: +39 02 23998309 > Mobile: +39 333 4963172 > Email: pierangelo.masarati(a)sys-net.it > --------------------------------------- >

1 0

Re: (ITS#5408) back-ldif bugs
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

On Thu, April 17, 2008 18:18, h.b.furuseth(a)usit.uio.no wrote: > On Thu, April 17, 2008 02:12, Howard Chu wrote: >> fails on test005 > > Did before too, I think. Probably canŽt test this week, sorry. Yes I could. And yes, ldif.c rev 1.81 failed the same way. > The full patch is... closer to allowing work on a full ./run -b ldif all. The one IŽve been working on but not committed the rest of yet, I mean. -- Hallvard

1 0

Re: (ITS#5474) Problem with schema validation in 2.4.8
by ando＠sys-net.it 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

ando(a)sys-net.it wrote: > The problem is that OpenLDAP 2.4 allows to add entries that contain > ABSTRACT objectClasses, as soon as no non-ABSTRACT class is subtyped > from them, which is clearly an error. > > It all reduces to a missing negation in the ABSTRACT subclassing check, > resulting in reversing the logic of the test. > > Please test servers/slapd/schema_check.c 1.112 -> 1.113 I also note that 2.3 suffers from the reverse of the reported issue, namely an abstract class is tolerated, even if no other class inherits from it. p. Ing. Pierangelo Masarati OpenLDAP Core Team SysNet s.r.l. via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA http://www.sys-net.it --------------------------------------- Office: +39 02 23998309 Mobile: +39 333 4963172 Email: pierangelo.masarati(a)sys-net.it ---------------------------------------

1 0

Re: (ITS#5474) Problem with schema validation in 2.4.8
by ando＠sys-net.it 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

benoitde(a)sympatico.ca wrote: > I tried to load a slapcat dump from OpenLDAP 2.3.27 into OpenLDAP 2.4.8, > and had problems with java entries. I narrowed down the problem with > this simple test case: > > LDIF: > dn: cn=REQ,dc=example,dc=com > javaClassName: Toto > objectClass: javaContainer > objectClass: javaObject > objectClass: javaNamingReference > javaFactory: TotoFactory > cn: REQ > javaReferenceAddress: #0#VER#1 > > Load of this LDIF in OpenLDAP 2.3.27: > > ldapadd -D"cn=Manager,dc=example,dc=com" -W -x -f /tmp/bug.ldif > Enter LDAP Password: > adding new entry "cn=REQUEST,dc=example,dc=com" > > Works, but in OpenLDAP 2.4.8: > > ldapadd -h myserver -p 1389 -D"cn=Manager,dc=example,dc=com" -W -x -f > /tmp/bug.ldif > Enter LDAP Password: > adding new entry "cn=REQUEST,dc=example,dc=com" > ldap_add: Object class violation (65) > additional info: instanstantiation of abstract objectClass 'javaObject' not > allowed > > And the entry is not loaded. The problem is that OpenLDAP 2.4 allows to add entries that contain ABSTRACT objectClasses, as soon as no non-ABSTRACT class is subtyped from them, which is clearly an error. It all reduces to a missing negation in the ABSTRACT subclassing check, resulting in reversing the logic of the test. Please test servers/slapd/schema_check.c 1.112 -> 1.113 p. Ing. Pierangelo Masarati OpenLDAP Core Team SysNet s.r.l. via Dossi, 8 - 27100 Pavia - ITALIA http://www.sys-net.it --------------------------------------- Office: +39 02 23998309 Mobile: +39 333 4963172 Email: pierangelo.masarati(a)sys-net.it ---------------------------------------

1 0

Re: (ITS#5465) Delta-Syncrepl cookie problems
by quanah＠zimbra.com 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

--On Thursday, April 17, 2008 6:42 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: > > --On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:57 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: > >> --On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:52 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: >> >>> --On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:38 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: > > Looking at the fix to ITS#5376 and ITS#5378, it should fix this problem > when it occurs, but it doesn't however address why the issue occurs. > Which is still problematic. :/ Just to note, Stanford is hitting this problem as well, after going from 2.3.35 to 2.3.41. So it looks like a regression. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

1 0

Re: (ITS#5465) Delta-Syncrepl cookie problems
by quanah＠zimbra.com 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

--On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:57 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: > --On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:52 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: > >> --On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:38 PM +0000 quanah(a)zimbra.com wrote: Looking at the fix to ITS#5376 and ITS#5378, it should fix this problem when it occurs, but it doesn't however address why the issue occurs. Which is still problematic. :/ --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

1 0

Re: (ITS#5408) back-ldif bugs
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

On Thu, April 17, 2008 02:12, Howard Chu wrote: > fails on test005 Did before too, I think. Probably canŽt test this week, sorry. The full patch is... closer to allowing work on a full ./run -b ldif all.

1 0

(ITS#5474) Problem with schema validation in 2.4.8
by benoitde＠sympatico.ca 17 Apr '08

17 Apr '08

Full_Name: Denis Benoit Version: 2.4.8 OS: RedHat enterprise 5 URL: Submission from: (NULL) (64.254.229.130) I tried to load a slapcat dump from OpenLDAP 2.3.27 into OpenLDAP 2.4.8, and had problems with java entries. I narrowed down the problem with this simple test case: LDIF: dn: cn=REQ,dc=example,dc=com javaClassName: Toto objectClass: javaContainer objectClass: javaObject objectClass: javaNamingReference javaFactory: TotoFactory cn: REQ javaReferenceAddress: #0#VER#1 Load of this LDIF in OpenLDAP 2.3.27: ldapadd -D"cn=Manager,dc=example,dc=com" -W -x -f /tmp/bug.ldif Enter LDAP Password: adding new entry "cn=REQUEST,dc=example,dc=com" Works, but in OpenLDAP 2.4.8: ldapadd -h myserver -p 1389 -D"cn=Manager,dc=example,dc=com" -W -x -f /tmp/bug.ldif Enter LDAP Password: adding new entry "cn=REQUEST,dc=example,dc=com" ldap_add: Object class violation (65) additional info: instanstantiation of abstract objectClass 'javaObject' not allowed And the entry is not loaded.

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