2:23 p.m.
* From: ando(a)OpenLDAP.org
* Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:54:38 GMT
* Auto-submitted: auto-generated (OpenLDAP-CVS)
Update of /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/tests/data
Modified Files:
slapd.conf 1.43 -> 1.44
Log Message:
add checkpoint as required
What was the motivation for this change? It's pummeling the hell out of my
laptop hard drive...
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
2:36 p.m.
New subject: commit: ldap/tests/data slapd.conf
Howard Chu wrote:
> * From: ando(a)OpenLDAP.org
> * Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:54:38 GMT
> * Auto-submitted: auto-generated (OpenLDAP-CVS)
>
> Update of /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/tests/data
>
> Modified Files:
> slapd.conf 1.43 -> 1.44
>
> Log Message:
> add checkpoint as required
What was the motivation for this change? It's pummeling the hell out of
my laptop hard drive...
I don't recall the *exact* reason, but it was related to someone
complaining about a bug in checkpoint code, or so. It's been sitting on
my working dir for quite a while, and it seemed (almost) harmless.
Perhaps the values should be a little more forgiving? Something like
checkpoint 1024 10
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
-----------------------------------
2:46 p.m.
New subject: commit: ldap/tests/data slapd.conf
Pierangelo Masarati wrote:
Howard Chu wrote:
>> * From: ando(a)OpenLDAP.org
>> * Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:54:38 GMT
>> * Auto-submitted: auto-generated (OpenLDAP-CVS)
>>
>> Update of /repo/OpenLDAP/pkg/ldap/tests/data
>>
>> Modified Files:
>> slapd.conf 1.43 -> 1.44
>>
>> Log Message:
>> add checkpoint as required
> What was the motivation for this change? It's pummeling the hell out of
> my laptop hard drive...
I don't recall the *exact* reason, but it was related to someone
complaining about a bug in checkpoint code, or so. It's been sitting on
my working dir for quite a while, and it seemed (almost) harmless.
Perhaps the values should be a little more forgiving? Something like
checkpoint 1024 10
That would probably be nicer, yes. But I suppose it also depends on the nature
of the bug you were trying to track down...
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
5499
days inactive
5499
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Howard Chu -
Pierangelo Masarati