openldap-devel February 2009

openldap-devel@openldap.org

16 participants
20 discussions

contextCSN of subordinate syncrepl DBs
by Rein Tollevik 22 Nov '09

22 Nov '09

I've been trying to figure out why syncrepl used on a backend that is subordinate to a glue database with the syncprov overlay should save the contextCSN in the suffix of the glue database rather than the suffix of the backend where syncrepl is used. But all I come up with are reasons why this should not be the case. So, unless anyone can enlighten me as to what I'm missing, I suggest that this be changed. The problem with the current design is that it makes it impossible to reliably replicate more than one subordinate db from the same remote server, as there are now race conditions where one of the subordinate backends could save an updated contextCSN value that is picked up by the other before it has finished its synchronization. An example of a configuration where more than one subordinate db replicated from the same server might be necessary is the central master described in my previous posting in http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/200806/msg00041.html My idea as to how this race condition could be verified was to add enough entries to one of the backends (while the consumer was stopped) to make it possible to restart the consumer after the first backend had saved the updated contextCSN but before the second has finished its synchronization. But I was able to produce it by simply add or delete of an entry in one of the backends before starting the consumer. Far to often was the backend without any changes able to pick up and save the updated contextCSN from the producer before syncrepl on the second backend fetched its initial value. I.e it started with an updated contextCSN and didn't receive the changes that had taken place on the producer. If syncrepl stored the values in the suffix of their own database then they wouldn't interfere with each other like this. There is a similar problem in syncprov, as it must use the lowest contextCSN value (with a given sid) saved by the syncrepl backends configured within the subtree where syncprov is used. But to do that it also needs to distinguish the contextCSN values of each syncrepl backend, which it can't do when they all save them in the glue suffix. This also implies that syncprov must ignore contextCSN updates from syncrepl until all syncrepl backends has saved a value, and that syncprov on the provider must send newCookie sync info messages when it updates its contextCSN value when the changed entry isn't being replicated to a consumer. I.e as outlined in the message referred to above. Neither of these changes should interfere with ordinary multi-master configurations where syncrepl and syncprov are both use on the same (glue) database. I'll volunteer to implement and test the necessary changes if this is the right solution. But to know whether my analysis is correct or not I need feedback. So, comments please? -- Rein Tollevik Basefarm AS

2 6

dITStructureRules/nameForms in subschema subentry for informational purpose
by Michael Ströder 21 Mar '09

21 Mar '09

HI! Discussed this very briefly with Howard at LDAPcon 2007 based on an idea of Steve: Support for dITStructureRules and nameForms is still in OpenLDAP's TODO. In the meanwhile slapd could accept definitions for both in slapd.conf and simply pass them on to a schema-aware LDAP client for informational purpose without enforcing them. Same function like rootDSE <file> in slapd.conf. Opinions? Ciao, Michael. -- Michael Ströder E-Mail: michael(a)stroeder.com http://www.stroeder.com

2 4

cancel operation
by manu＠netbsd.org 16 Mar '09

16 Mar '09

Hello I found a bug in slapo-nops: if all modify operations are idempotent, I end up with op->orm_modlist being NULL, and slapd stops there. Here is the current code in slapo-nops that deals with that condition: if ((m = op->orm_modlist) == NULL) { op->o_bd->bd_info = (BackendInfo *)(on->on_info); send_ldap_error(op, rs, LDAP_SUCCESS, ""); return(rs->sr_err); } Obviously, this is not doing what it should. I need to abort the operation while returning LDAP_SUCCESS to the client. How should this be done? -- Emmanuel Dreyfus http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz manu(a)netbsd.org

3 7

Implementing a matching rule for binary (ie: 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.5)
by Stef 26 Feb '09

26 Feb '09

I'm working on using openldap to store certificate requests (ie: PKCS#10 and SPKAC). I thought I'd use the binary syntax '1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.5' for my custom attribute. However there doesn't seem to be a equality matching rule for that syntax. I could implement one, but would such a contribution be accepted by the openldap project? I've looked around online, but I can't seem to find an OID for such a matching rule declared anywhere. Am I barking up the wrong tree? If not I'll whip up a patch. Cheers, Stef Walter

3 4

Re: commit: ldap/servers/slapd schema_check.c
by Pierangelo Masarati 21 Feb '09

21 Feb '09

ando(a)OpenLDAP.org wrote: > Update of /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/servers/slapd > > Modified Files: > schema_check.c 1.118 -> 1.119 > > Log Message: > don't allow to add distinguished values when other values of naming attributes are already present (ITS#5965) ... and the naming attribute is single-valued! :) 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 Fax: +39 0382 476497 Email: ando(a)sys-net.it -----------------------------------

1 0

Re: N-Way docs
by Gavin Henry 19 Feb '09

19 Feb '09

Good point. Will clear it up then. ------Original Message------ From: Howard Chu To: Gavin Henry Cc: OpenLDAP Devel Subject: Re: N-Way docs Sent: 19 Feb 2009 21:16 Gavin Henry wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to re-write the N-Way section using slapd.conf syntax to make things easier for people and show how to convert it to slapd.d at the end. > > It looks like cn=config is getting in the way of people testing N-Way for now. > > Thoughts? No. slapd.conf is being phased out. People need to get used to cn=config. People who can't read LDIF need to learn how, otherwise they're in no position to be administering an LDAP server. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/ -- Kind Regards, Gavin Henry. Managing Director. T +44 (0) 1224 279484 M +44 (0) 7930 323266 F +44 (0) 1224 824887 E ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com Open Source. Open Solutions(tm). http://www.suretecsystems.com/ Suretec Systems is a limited company registered in Scotland. Registered number: SC258005. Registered office: 13 Whiteley Well Place, Inverurie, Aberdeenshire, AB51 4FP. Subject to disclaimer at http://www.suretecgroup.com/disclaimer.html

1 0

RE: 2.4.14 prerelease call for testing #2
by Brett Maxfield 19 Feb '09

19 Feb '09

Doesnt "currently asm" indicate asm spinlocks.. Which can be unreliable. These can be even more unreliable with unpatched bdb? So perhaps you should try posix style semaphores.. Forcing posix/pthreads both at compile time and at run time.. -----Original Message----- From: Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> Sent: Tuesday, 17 February 2009 1:26 AM To: Dieter Kluenter <dieter(a)dkluenter.de> Cc: openldap-devel(a)openldap.org Subject: Re: 2.4.14 prerelease call for testing #2 Dieter Kluenter wrote: > Aaron Richton<richton(a)nbcs.rutgers.edu> writes: [..snip..] > #0 0x00002b77bc3da12d in __lock_detect () > from /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.7/lib/libdb-4.7.so > Current language: auto; currently asm Which is pretty squarely inside BerkeleyDB. But nobody else reported any such problem yet. Seems you'll have to check your BDB build.

4 4

N-Way docs
by Gavin Henry 19 Feb '09

19 Feb '09

Hi All, I would like to re-write the N-Way section using slapd.conf syntax to make things easier for people and show how to convert it to slapd.d at the end. It looks like cn=config is getting in the way of people testing N-Way for now. Thoughts? Thanks. -- Kind Regards, Gavin Henry. T +44 (0) 1224 279484 M +44 (0) 7930 323266 F +44 (0) 1224 824887 E ghenry(a)suretecsystems.com Open Source. Open Solutions(tm). http://www.suretecsystems.com/ Suretec Systems is a limited company registered in Scotland. Registered number: SC258005. Registered office: 13 Whiteley Well Place, Inverurie, Aberdeenshire, AB51 4FP. Subject to disclaimer at http://www.suretecgroup.com/disclaimer.html

3 2

2.4.14 prerelease call for testing #2
by Quanah Gibson-Mount 18 Feb '09

18 Feb '09

Several more fixes completed, please test. Thanks! Still waiting on confirmation from someone with gnutls. ;) --Quanah --On February 9, 2009 8:11:20 AM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)zimbra.com> wrote: > Please test current RE24 CVS. In particular, if people can test: > > (a) Building without TLS & without sasl > (b) Building without TLS > (c) Building without sasl > (d) If at least one person can build against GnuTLS instead of OpenSSL > > Much appreciated. :) > > Thanks, > > --Quanah > > -- > > Quanah Gibson-Mount > Principal Software Engineer > Zimbra, Inc > -------------------- > Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Engineer Zimbra, Inc -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

6 30

Old ITSs again
by Howard Chu 17 Feb '09

17 Feb '09

ITS#2560 and #2802 are both EBCDIC dependencies, from nearly 6 years ago. Since it appears no one has cared in the intervening time, do we want to pay them any more attention, or just close them? I borrowed access to the mainframe when I completed the port in 2002, and don't have that access any more, so I have no way to verify any fixes anyway. Anyone else? -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-devel February 2009