Re: DEL don't get synced

[Buchan Milne <bgmilne@staff.telkomsa.net>]

On Tuesday, 21 February 2012 11:25:22 Marc Patermann wrote:
> Howard,
> 
> 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
> >>>> moment.
> >>> 
> >>> Already known, ITS#7052.
> >> 
> >> Thanks.
> >> 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:

commit 10c81e2a46c9b603ba1dfcf53422573d5068ba04
Author: Howard Chu <hyc@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.


Regards,
Buchan