On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 07:16:57PM +0000, Howard Chu wrote:
git shows that back-bdb didn't change between 2.4.39 and 2.4.40. The only relevant change was actually in .39. ITS#7761.
I added some abort() in the code to check where this LDAP_BUSY was coming from and it is indeed in back-bdb/search.c where ITS#7761 patch added the LDAP_BUSY case.
What confuses me is that I do not touch the config. Could it be caused by schema replication? I have tjings like this in the logs: syncrepl_entry: rid=017 be_add cn={12}supann2009,cn=schema,cn=config failed (53) But it does not appear at the time LDPA_BUSY is raised.