[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: commit: ldap/servers/slapd/back-bdb proto-bdb.h search.c (ITS#3172)

In looking at Cyrus SASL and, in particular, the GSSAPI mechanism
with Jong, I cannot see how SASL_NOTDONE could result here from
proper use of Cyrus SASL.  I suspect that something must be stomping
on the internals of Cyrus SASL... in particular (conn_con)text->state.
Or possibly we're not properly managing connection contexts.


At 03:10 PM 6/26/2004, jongchoi@OpenLDAP.org wrote:
>Let's move this thread back to ITS#3172 although it seems to me that the
>segfault caught in the current Quanah's setup is similar but not the same as
>the ones described in ITS#3172. In addition, the segfault does not seem to
>happen only with two active replicas. It can happen with only one. Hence it
>seems to be a timing issue that the fault was observed only with the two
>The message I got right before segfault is:
>sb_sasl_write: failed to encode packet: can't request info until later in
>I looked into the cyrus library code although I'm not that familiar with it.
>sasl_encode() returns SASL_NOTDONE and it does so when the context is not in
>the authenticated state.
>Isn't it that the max buf size for SASL is 64K in OpenLDAP ?
>The syncrepl master returns a vector message containing the IDs of the
>deleted/present entries.
>Currently, the size of this message is slightly larger than 4KB (256 UUIDs,
>each 16 octets).
>sasl_encode() returned the error when it tries to send a normal entry right
>after three such vector messages were sent.
>After this error, it was observed that the slapd can be caught a segfult in
>a locale routine for err logging.
>- Jong-Hyuk
>> >> I then stopped one replica, and restarted it.  The master immediately
>> > a
>> >> segfault.
>> >
>> > Was this segfault the same as the one described in ITS#3172 ?
>> There's been some offline discussion with Jong. ;) The answer here is yes,
>> and Jong will have access to my servers for testing starting tomorrow.