LOL
-----Original Message----- From: openldap-bugs-bounces+worganc=nortel.com@openldap.org [mailto:openldap-bugs-bounces+worganc=nortel.com@openldap.org] On Behalf Of jclarke@linagora.com Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:05 PM To: openldap-its@openldap.org Subject: (ITS#5954) deleting one of several syncrepl consumers deletes thewrong one
Full_Name: Jonathan Clarke Version: RE24 OS: CentOS URL: http://milopita.phillipoux.net/jonathan-clarke-090217.patch Submission from: (NULL) (213.41.243.192)
Hi all,
It seems that when adding syncrepl consumers to be->be_syncinfo, they are added in LIFO order. However, when deleting the nth syncrepl consumer via a ldapdelete on cn=config from be->be_syncinfo, the nth entry in the list is removed, which is not the same one.
To reproduce: 1) If we start with this in cn=config:
olcSyncRepl: {0}rid=001 olcSyncRepl: {1}rid=002
The list order is (schematically): be->be_syncinfo = {rid=002, rid=001}
2) Add add a rid=003, we have in cn=config: olcSyncRepl: {0}rid=001 olcSyncRepl: {1}rid=002 olcSyncRepl: {2}rid=003
and the list is: be->be_syncinfo = {rid=003, rid=002, rid=001}
3) We attempt to delete rid=003: dn: ...,cn=config changeType: modify delete: olcSyncRepl olcSyncRepl: {2}rid=003
The list then contains, value number 2 having been deleted: be->be_syncinfo = {rid=003, rid=002}
The above patch changes the order syncrepl info is inserted in the list. This corrects the problem, and I have not seen any other consequences (by running the test suite and browsing the code).
Is this OK? My apologies if I have missed something big here.