https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8852
--- Comment #8 from OndÅ™ej KuznÃk <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> ---
For comparison, using deltasync (and sortvals!) makes the consumer take a
similar amount of CPU time (about +50-90 % on the provider's) to process the
10k value additions, just like Ryan noted earlier.
On the other idea, no clue on whether we can somehow limit the amount of data
queued up without severely impairing replication progress.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8852
--- Comment #7 from OndÅ™ej KuznÃk <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> ---
Making attr_cmp do a linear sweep for sortvals attributes (instead of the
quadratic match it has to do right now) makes the consumer 7-8x slower than a
provider across the board with the environment provided. I might have expected
something like 3-4x but that's out of scope for this particular ITS.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6198
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |9204
Referenced Issues:
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9204
[Issue 9204] slapo-constraint allows anyone to apply Relax control
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8884
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|bugs(a)openldap.org |hyc(a)openldap.org
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8498
Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |TEST
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8852
--- Comment #6 from OndÅ™ej KuznÃk <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> ---
attr_cmp should check the attribute is a sortval and if so, should diff without
resolving to a double loop.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8498
--- Comment #5 from Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org> ---
Fixed in master 2939df1a1dead2a11d1878ccd246660cda2b41a6
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8852
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|bugs(a)openldap.org |ondra(a)mistotebe.net
--- Comment #5 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
May be possible to improve diff code for standard syncrepl to improve
performance on the consumer side if the attribute is sorted via sortvals, needs
investigation.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.