[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#5073) Syncrepl spinlock
--On August 6, 2007 5:01:08 PM +0000 firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> --On August 6, 2007 9:17:01 AM +0000 email@example.com wrote:
>> quanah@OpenLDAP.org wrote:
>>> Full_Name: Quanah Gibson-Mount
>>> Version: 2.3.37
>>> OS: Linux
>>> Submission from: (NULL) (220.127.116.11)
>>> If you create a syncrepl master that serves the "" base, and then set up
>>> a syncrepl consumer to pull down "dc=example,dc=com", which does *not*
>>> exist on the master, the replica will sit at 100% CPU, endlessly trying
>>> to add nothing.
>> I'm not observing this with either re23 nor HEAD. The initial search
>> correctly fails with noSuchObject, and then both slapds sit at 0% CPU.
>> Can you give further details?
> I'll look at reproducing it again.
> In this particular case, the master had a database rooted at "", with
> some data around "cn=zimbra" contained in it. A replica was configured
> as a syncrepl client, but with "dc=example,dc=com" as its base, by
> mistake. This resulted in the CPU usage shooting to 100% on the replica,
> and the logs showing it trying to add without success.
Okay, I figured it out -- This is definitely a misconfiguration type
The database is something like:
Then the syncrepl config has:
I'm not sure this is something that should be allowed -- where the search
base is broader than the database.
Principal Software Engineer
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration