Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
I'm confused here. Is it a 2.4 change?
Must be, and seems to be a really odd requirement to me. Why does the consumer need to know about it? Why should it be required to load the accesslog module?
As i said, when the __producer__ is configured with the slapo-accesslog(5) overlay, gets the the auditContext operational attribute set in the database's context entry. This may be useful to be able to determine what log context is logging modifications to that context.
As a side effect, syncrepl replicates this attribute as well in the __consumer__. However, if this attribute is not defined in the __consumer__'s schema, odd things could happen.
So, the only reason to have slapo-accesslog(5) built and loaded **BUT NOT INSTANTIATED** on the __consumer__ (doesn't sound such strikingly resource intensive a requirement) is to have this attribute defined in the schema. If this sounds so unreasonable, please suggest (and code) a better strategy. I'm open to everything (including zapping auditContext at all, unless anyone out there finds it useful and is actively using it).
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 Email: pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it ---------------------------------------