On Tuesday, 21 February 2012 11:25:22 Marc Patermann wrote:
Howard Chu schrieb (31.01.2012 14:22 Uhr):
> Marc Patermann wrote:
>> Howard Chu schrieb (31.01.2012 12:08 Uhr):
>>> Marc Patermann wrote:
>>>> under some circumstances DEL don't get replicated to the consumers
>>>> (SyncRepl). I think this has to do with other changes at the some
>>> Already known, ITS#7052.
>> So this is fixed in 2.6.27 (and later).
>> The master already is 2.4.28, the consumers are older.
>> So I have to update the consumers, right?
> Yes, the fix was consumer side. Also, the fix was incomplete, an
> additional fix will be in 2.4.29.
Around begin of February I built an RPM based on pre 2.4.29 code from git.
With this installed on a consumer I sill get the same behavior, that DEL
do not get replicated, if one of the server was restarted and the entry
existed before the restart. This is very bad.
It seems the objects between consumer and provider loose "contact".
When the object changed (ADD or MOD) even DEL get replicated.
I don't know what to do, because this destroys the consistency in our
ldap system. :(
In about more than 5 years in having openldap in production I have never
had such bad issues.
There are reverted commits in git (ITS#7162). Should a build again with
current git status?
As far as I have read in changelogs and ITS, anything from
OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_4 (including 2.4.29) before:
Author: Howard Chu <hyc(a)openldap.org>
Date: Sun Feb 12 21:07:25 2012 -0800
ITS#7162 Revert "ITS#7052 ignore Adds with too old entryCSN"
This reverts commit ba4366eae098c0e4950a78b1da8d79ffe8b34fee.
The patch caused a regression (ITS#7162).
will probably still be broken.