openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20960 discussions

Re: (ITS#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

<quote who="ando(a)sys-net.it"> > ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: > >> I read that as if there is no DB_CONFIG, one gets created from the >> dbconfig directives. If there is one, dbconfig stuff gets ignored and >> the >> DB_CONFIG file is used. >> >> But yes, it's not clear what happens in that situation. So, I go back to >> you ;-) What does the code actually do? If it does indeed ignore >> dbconfig >> and honour DB_CONFIG then we say that. >> >> As I read your comments, you sound like you don't know what the code >> does > > Exactly. Oh, well excuse me for presuming! > >> (I don't as I haven't looked, but I'd be very surprised if you actually >> don't know). So this brings me back to my first point; we make it say >> what >> the code actually does do in the situation that there is a DB_CONFIG >> file >> and dbconfig directives in slapd.conf or slapd.d/ > > After reading the code, it seems that if reading from slapd.conf and the > DB_CONFIG is in place, any slapd.conf dbconfig directive is ignored. OK, sorry. I should have taken the time to read it myself. So we just amend the man page to say that. Good. > > 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#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ando＠sys-net.it 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: > I read that as if there is no DB_CONFIG, one gets created from the > dbconfig directives. If there is one, dbconfig stuff gets ignored and the > DB_CONFIG file is used. > > But yes, it's not clear what happens in that situation. So, I go back to > you ;-) What does the code actually do? If it does indeed ignore dbconfig > and honour DB_CONFIG then we say that. > > As I read your comments, you sound like you don't know what the code does Exactly. > (I don't as I haven't looked, but I'd be very surprised if you actually > don't know). So this brings me back to my first point; we make it say what > the code actually does do in the situation that there is a DB_CONFIG file > and dbconfig directives in slapd.conf or slapd.d/ After reading the code, it seems that if reading from slapd.conf and the DB_CONFIG is in place, any slapd.conf dbconfig directive is ignored. 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#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

<quote who="Pierangelo Masarati"> > ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: > >>> I think the point is not what the code should (or should not) do, or >>> whether its current behavior is correct or not; it's rather that the >>> man >>> page, as far as I understand it, is not clear about what the code >>> currently does. >> >> Ok, well the text should reflect what the code does. I think I'm missing >> the point of your question. If the text doesn't currently match what is >> actually happening in the code, then we fix the man page so it does. > > My point is that from that text I don't understand what the code does. > Either it's my English (could well be), or it needs to be reworded. I'm > quoting here the original text: > > snip... > > dbconfig <Berkeley-DB-setting> > Specify a configuration directive to be placed in the DB_CONFIG > file of the database directory. The dbconfig directive is just > a convenience to allow all necessary configuration to be set in > the slapd.conf file. The options set using this directive will > only be written to the DB_CONFIG file if no such file existed > at server startup time. This allows one to set initial values > without overwriting/destroying a DB_CONFIG file that was > already customized through other means. > > snip... > > So it seems to be quite clear about what's going to happen if no > DB_CONFIG exists, but not as clear about what happens if DB_CONFIG > already exists, apart from not getting overwritten or otherwise modified. I read that as if there is no DB_CONFIG, one gets created from the dbconfig directives. If there is one, dbconfig stuff gets ignored and the DB_CONFIG file is used. But yes, it's not clear what happens in that situation. So, I go back to you ;-) What does the code actually do? If it does indeed ignore dbconfig and honour DB_CONFIG then we say that. As I read your comments, you sound like you don't know what the code does (I don't as I haven't looked, but I'd be very surprised if you actually don't know). So this brings me back to my first point; we make it say what the code actually does do in the situation that there is a DB_CONFIG file and dbconfig directives in slapd.conf or slapd.d/ Or am I being extremely stupid here? Thanks, Gavin.

1 0

Re: (ITS#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ando＠sys-net.it 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >> I think the point is not what the code should (or should not) do, or >> whether its current behavior is correct or not; it's rather that the man >> page, as far as I understand it, is not clear about what the code >> currently does. > > Ok, well the text should reflect what the code does. I think I'm missing > the point of your question. If the text doesn't currently match what is > actually happening in the code, then we fix the man page so it does. My point is that from that text I don't understand what the code does. Either it's my English (could well be), or it needs to be reworded. I'm quoting here the original text: snip... dbconfig <Berkeley-DB-setting> Specify a configuration directive to be placed in the DB_CONFIG file of the database directory. The dbconfig directive is just a convenience to allow all necessary configuration to be set in the slapd.conf file. The options set using this directive will only be written to the DB_CONFIG file if no such file existed at server startup time. This allows one to set initial values without overwriting/destroying a DB_CONFIG file that was already customized through other means. snip... So it seems to be quite clear about what's going to happen if no DB_CONFIG exists, but not as clear about what happens if DB_CONFIG already exists, apart from not getting overwritten or otherwise modified. 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#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

<quote who="ando(a)sys-net.it"> > ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >>> The slapd-bdb(5) man page seems to me unclear with respect to the >>> dbconfig >>> directive. In fact, what I gather from the text is that if no >>> DB_CONFIG >>> file >>> exists, any dbconfig directive will be used to generate one; otherwise, >>> an >>> existing DB_CONFIG file will not be altered. What is unclear is what >>> happens if >>> both a DB_CONFIG file and any dbconfig directives exist, and they >>> differ? >>> Who >>> takes the precedence? What if any dbconfig directive is not present in >>> the >>> DB_CONFIG file? >>> >> >> I would say since dbconfig directives only work on a restart of slapd, >> and >> that if a DB_CONFIG is present, the DB_CONFIG should *always* take >> precedence. If dbconfig changes could make a difference via back-config, >> which they can't without a restart, then dbconfig stuff should override >> any DB_CONFIG. > > Gavin, > > I think the point is not what the code should (or should not) do, or > whether its current behavior is correct or not; it's rather that the man > page, as far as I understand it, is not clear about what the code > currently does. Ok, well the text should reflect what the code does. I think I'm missing the point of your question. If the text doesn't currently match what is actually happening in the code, then we fix the man page so it does.

1 0

Re: (ITS#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ando＠sys-net.it 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com wrote: >> The slapd-bdb(5) man page seems to me unclear with respect to the dbconfig >> directive. In fact, what I gather from the text is that if no DB_CONFIG >> file >> exists, any dbconfig directive will be used to generate one; otherwise, an >> existing DB_CONFIG file will not be altered. What is unclear is what >> happens if >> both a DB_CONFIG file and any dbconfig directives exist, and they differ? >> Who >> takes the precedence? What if any dbconfig directive is not present in >> the >> DB_CONFIG file? >> > > I would say since dbconfig directives only work on a restart of slapd, and > that if a DB_CONFIG is present, the DB_CONFIG should *always* take > precedence. If dbconfig changes could make a difference via back-config, > which they can't without a restart, then dbconfig stuff should override > any DB_CONFIG. Gavin, I think the point is not what the code should (or should not) do, or whether its current behavior is correct or not; it's rather that the man page, as far as I understand it, is not clear about what the code currently does. 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#5132) test052 fails: ldapadd failed (21)!
by ando＠sys-net.it 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

Fixed in HEAD (HEAD only); please test. 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#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ghenry＠suretecsystems.com 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

> > The slapd-bdb(5) man page seems to me unclear with respect to the dbconfig > directive. In fact, what I gather from the text is that if no DB_CONFIG > file > exists, any dbconfig directive will be used to generate one; otherwise, an > existing DB_CONFIG file will not be altered. What is unclear is what > happens if > both a DB_CONFIG file and any dbconfig directives exist, and they differ? > Who > takes the precedence? What if any dbconfig directive is not present in > the > DB_CONFIG file? > I would say since dbconfig directives only work on a restart of slapd, and that if a DB_CONFIG is present, the DB_CONFIG should *always* take precedence. If dbconfig changes could make a difference via back-config, which they can't without a restart, then dbconfig stuff should override any DB_CONFIG. I hope that makes sense? Gavin.

1 0

(ITS#5134) dbconfig vs. DB_CONFIG
by ando＠sys-net.it 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

Full_Name: Pierangelo Masarati Version: HEAD/re24/re23 OS: irrelevant URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (193.203.230.29) Submitted by: ando The slapd-bdb(5) man page seems to me unclear with respect to the dbconfig directive. In fact, what I gather from the text is that if no DB_CONFIG file exists, any dbconfig directive will be used to generate one; otherwise, an existing DB_CONFIG file will not be altered. What is unclear is what happens if both a DB_CONFIG file and any dbconfig directives exist, and they differ? Who takes the precedence? What if any dbconfig directive is not present in the DB_CONFIG file? p.

1 0

(ITS#5133) Synchronous replication on slave doesn't notice lost network connection
by audrius.valunas＠teo.lt 13 Sep '07

13 Sep '07

Full_Name: Audrius Valunas Version: openldap2-2.3.27-25 OS: SUSE LINUX 10.0 (i586) OSS URL: Submission from: (NULL) (212.59.0.201) There is synchronous replication between mastyer and slave. When network connectivity problems occur master closes tcp connection but slave doesn't notice those problems, it still has tcp connection open, but in real it is not receiving updates any more. I think that can be solved adding some ack from slave because sending on such a socket would fail and force slave to retry connection.

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