Re: (ITS#4780) ACL set memory leak

[dhawes@vt.edu]

On Saturday 16 December 2006 08:54, ando@sys-net.it wrote:
> dhawes@vt.edu wrote:
> > When using ACL sets, OpenLDAP 2.3.30 steadily uses up all the system
> > memory before crashing (slapd: ch_malloc.c:57: ch_malloc: Assertion `0'
> > failed).
> >
> > The system is loaded using SLAMD with 4 clients doing anonymous searches
> > on a filter file of approximately 300,000 filters (taken from a typical
> > day on a production server).  SLAMD reports that 2885650 entries are
> > returned in the 30 minutes it takes to use up all available memory (4G).
> >
> > The instance contains approximately 1 million entries in a bdb backend,
> > and uses the following simple set of ACLs for this test:
> >
> > ...
> > access to dn.base=""
> >     by * read
> >
> > access to dn.base="cn=Subschema"
> >     by * read
> >
> > access to dn.base="dc=example,dc=com"
> >     by * read
> >
> > access to dn.base="ou=People,dc=example,dc=com"
> >     by * read
> >
> > access to *
> >     by set="[string1] & [string2]" read
> >     by peername.ip=<slamd client ip 1> read
> >     by peername.ip=<slamd client ip 2> read
> >     by peername.ip=<slamd client ip 3> read
> >     by peername.ip=<slamd client ip 4> read
> >     by * none
> > ...
> >
> > Removing the "by set=" clause and running the SLAMD job causes OpenLDAP
> > memory usage to stabilize.
> >
> > I notice the same behavior on 2.3.27, but did not notice it with older
> > versions such as 2.2.26.
>
> I can't confirm this issue neither with HEAD nor with re23; I used
> valgrind and the set string you posted verbatim, although I didn't use
> slamd.  However, right now I don't see how it may be a matter of
> concurrency.

I notice the same behavior with 2.3.31 as well.  From my testing 2.2.30 does 
not exhibit this behavior while 2.3.4 (and later) does.

dave