https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4066
--- Comment #5 from knotmecute <kmcbacklink(a)gmail.com> ---
Step into the vibrant world of Knotmecute's Banjaran collection, where
exquisite bohemian jewelry takes center stage, inspired by tribal aesthetics
and vibrant cultures. Our brand strives to revive the rich heritage art of
tribes, incorporating abstract patterns and colorful mirror work into stunning
pieces that make a bold and stylish statement.
Crafted with meticulous precision and attention to detail, our luxury bohemian
jewels are designed to complement a variety of occasions, from carefree beach
travels to destination weddings. Each piece is thoughtfully created to evoke a
sense of wanderlust and adventure, adding a touch of boho charm to your jewelry
ensemble.
The Banjara collection offers a wide range of accessories that cater to every
woman's unique style and trending preferences. Whether you desire a statement
necklace to elevate your evening attire or vibrant earrings to accentuate your
beachy look, we have the perfect piece to fulfill your needs.
Every jewelry piece in the Banjara collection is a work of art, meticulously
handcrafted with vibrant colors, intricate mirror work, and captivating
patterns. These colorful jewels go beyond being mere accessories—they carry a
personalized touch, reflecting the essence of your vibrant spirit.
Embrace the beauty of bohemian aesthetics with Knotmecute's Banjara brand.
Discover our collection and adorn yourself with these stunning jewels that will
turn heads wherever you go. Experience the joy of wearing luxurious, colorful
bohemian jewelry that reflects your individuality and leaves a lasting
impression.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10066
Issue ID: 10066
Summary: fsync -> fcntl(F_FULLFSYNC) on Apple platforms?
Product: LMDB
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Mac OS
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: christophersauer(a)pacbell.net
Target Milestone: ---
Hi, Howard,
I was thinking of adopting LMDB for a cross-platform project, but when quickly
browsing the code, didn't see specializations for Apple platform' weakened
fsync -> fcntl(F_FULLFSYNC). (Doc quick link, if useful:
https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/System/Conceptual…)
Should I be concerned? I think it's very likely that you're way ahead of me,
but I just wanted to check in. (And couldn't otherwise find anything online
about this.)
Thanks so much for all you do!
Chris
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10054
Issue ID: 10054
Summary: Value size limited to 2,147,479,552 bytes
Product: LMDB
Version: unspecified
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: louis(a)meilisearch.com
Target Milestone: ---
Hello,
According to the documentation[0], a database that is not using `MDB_DUPSORT`
can store values up to `0xffffffff` bytes (around 4GB).
In practice, under Linux, the actual limit is `0x7ffff000` though (2^31 - 4096,
so around 2GB).
This is due to the write loop in `mdb_page_flush`. The `wsize` value
determining how many bytes will be written can be as big as
`4096*dp->mp_pages`[1], and the number of overflow pages grows with the size of
the value put inside the DB.
The `wsize` is not split in smaller chunks in the case where there are many
overflow pages to write, and as a result the call to `pwrite`[2] does not
perform a full write, but only a "short" write of 2147479552 bytes (the maximum
allowed on a call to `pwrite` on Linux[3]).
This would be OK if the short write condition was handled by looping and
performing another `pwrite` with the rest of the data, but instead `EIO` is
returned[4].
There seems to be a related, but different issue on macOS when trying to
`pwrite` more the 2^31 bytes, that was already reported[5].
This issue was reported to me by a Meilisearch user because it causes their
database indexing to fail[6]. I had to investigate a bit because their setup
was peculiar (high number of documents in their database) and the `EIO` error
code is not very descriptive of the underlying issue.
I join a C reproducer of the issue that attempts to add a 2147479553 bytes
value to the DB and fails with `EIO` (decreasing `nb_items` to a smaller value
such as `2107479552` does succeed)[7].
Thank you for making LMDB!
Louis Dureuil.
[0]:
https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/lmdb.h#LL284…
[1]:
https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c#LL3770…
[2]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c#L3820
[3]:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70368651/why-cant-linux-write-more-than…
[4]: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/mdb.master/libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c#L3840
[5]: https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9736
[6]: https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/3654
[7]: https://github.com/dureuill/lmdb_3654/tree/main
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10062
Issue ID: 10062
Summary: How to store a data item of length greater than 511 in
a dupsort db
Product: LMDB
Version: 0.9.30
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: mega.alpha100(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Is there a workaround to storing a data item with a length greater than the
value of `fn mdb_env_get_maxkeysize()` or 511 in a dupsort db?
Also, I tried to change the value of the `MDB_MAXKEYSIZE` macro but that led to
an illegal instruction
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10056
Issue ID: 10056
Summary: test069-delta-multiprovider-starttls failures on
static builds
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.4
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: kaction(a)disroot.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hello.
I am getting following test error when trying to build `openldap` statically:
```
[nix-shell:/tmp/openldap-static/openldap-2.6.4/tests]$ ./run
test069-delta-multiprovider-starttls
Cleaning up test run directory leftover from previous run.
Running ./scripts/test069-delta-multiprovider-starttls for mdb...
running defines.sh
Initializing server configurations...
Starting server 1 on TCP/IP port 9011...
Using ldapsearch to check that server 1 is running...
Waiting 5 seconds for slapd to start...
Using ldapadd for context on server 1...
Starting server 2 on TCP/IP port 9012...
Using ldapsearch to check that server 2 is running...
Waiting 5 seconds for slapd to start...
Using ldapadd to populate server 1...
Waiting 7 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 1...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 2...
Comparing retrieved entries from server 1 and server 2...
Using ldapadd to populate server 2...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 1...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 2...
Comparing retrieved entries from server 1 and server 2...
Breaking replication between server 1 and 2...
Using ldapmodify to force conflicts between server 1 and 2...
Restoring replication between server 1 and 2...
Waiting 7 seconds for syncrepl to receive changes...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 1...
Using ldapsearch to read all the entries from server 2...
Comparing retrieved entries from server 1 and server 2...
test failed - server 1 and server 2 databases differ (561)
```
I added line number (561) into error message to pinpoint it more precisely.
And here is difference between databases:
```
--- /tmp/openldap-static/openldap-2.6.4/tests/testrun/server1.flt
2023-05-23 22:53:51.000965129 -0400
+++ /tmp/openldap-static/openldap-2.6.4/tests/testrun/server2.flt
2023-05-23 22:53:51.005965136 -0400
@@ -289,13 +289,10 @@
userPassword:: amFq
dn: cn=James A Jones 2,ou=Alumni Association,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com
-carLicense: 123-XYZ
cn: James A Jones 2
cn: James Jones
cn: Jim Jones
-description: Amazing
description: Bizarre
-description: Mindboggling
description: Stupendous
employeeNumber: 64
employeeType: deadwood
@@ -307,7 +304,7 @@
pager: +1 313 555 3923
postalAddress: Alumni Association $ 111 Maple St $ Anytown, MI 48109
seeAlso: cn=All Staff,ou=Groups,dc=example,dc=com
-sn: Surname
+sn: Jones
telephoneNumber: +1 313 555 0895
title: Mad Cow Researcher, UM Alumni Association
uid: jaj
```
Suggestions on what more information I can provide are welcome. You can also
try to build `pkgsStatic.openldap` in this nixpkgs
[commit](f9e32f61282275eb5fa9064e08bbd0a92d1187de)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10061
Issue ID: 10061
Summary: Query on setting TLSVerifyClient option set to demand
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ramajay52(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Dear Experts,
In my case, I had set TLSVerifyClient to demand.
I couldn't be able to establish a connection While providing
TLSCACertificateFile alone.
While setting the TLSVerifyClient option demand is it mandatory to provide the
following option?
1. TLSCACertificateFile
2. TLSCertificateKeyFile
3. TLSCertificateFile
Regards,
Ram
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8447
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|TEST |FIXED
--- Comment #6 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
Fixed in RE0.9:
• 76bad923
by Howard Chu at 2023-05-25T19:33:44+00:00
ITS#8447 fix cursor_put(MDB_CURRENT) on DUPSORT DB with different-sized data
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9736
Issue ID: 9736
Summary: pwrite bug in OSX breaking LMDB promise about the
maximum value size
Product: LMDB
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Mac OS
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: renault.cle(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
I was working with LMDB and found an issue when trying to write a value of
approximately 3.3GiB in the database, I dive into the LMDB source code of the
mdb_put method using the lldb debugger and found out that it was not related to
an issue in LMDB itself but rather a bug in the pwrite function of the Mac OS
libc implementation.
The pwrite function is given four parameters, the file descriptor, the buffer,
the count of bytes to write from the buffer and, the offset of where to write
it in the file. On Mac OS the count of bytes is a size_t that must be a 64bits
unsigned integer but when you call pwrite with a number bigger or equal to 2^31
it returns an error 22 (invalid argument). LMDB was returning a 22 error from
the mdb_put call and not an EINVAL because the error was cause by an internal
issue and not something catchable by LMDB.
I am not sure about what we can do, can we implement this single pwrite [1] as
multiple pwrite with counts smaller than 2^31 in a loop, just for Mac OS? Like
for Windows where we do specific things for this operating system too?
I also found this issue on the RocksDB repository [2] about a similar problem
they have with pwrite and write on Mac OS it seems. I understand that this is
not a real promise that LMDB is specifying but rather an "in theory" rule [3].
Thank you for your time,
kero
[1]:
https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/blob/01b1b7dc204abdf3849536979205dc9e3a0e3ece/…
[2]: https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/issues/5169
[3]: http://www.lmdb.tech/doc/group__mdb.html#structMDB__val
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10055
Issue ID: 10055
Summary: EOS EOL
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.44
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: documentation
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: andrew.hudson(a)rtx.com
Target Milestone: ---
Hello,
I work with Raytheon Intelligence and Space. I just have a quick question. I am
in charge of keeping track of the software that is on my program's environment.
We are on version 2.4.44. I am just wondering what the End of Support and the
end of life of this version. Thank you very much.
Andrew Hudson
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.