[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (ITS#5532) incorrect timestamp of slapd replica log
------=_Part_7580_3624331.1212031000971
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi, Quanah:
I'm considering upgrading from 2.3 to 2.4.x. I haven't test 2.4.x yet. Does
this bug exist in 2.4.x too?
Regards,
Hai
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>
wrote:
> --On Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:10 AM +0000 hai.zhao@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Full_Name: Zhao Hai
>> Version: 2.3.41
>> OS: Linux 2.4.21 arm
>> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/zhaohai-080527.patch
>> Submission from: (NULL) (205.209.140.4)
>>
>>
>> Problem:
>> race condition makes incorrect timestamp in replogfile, cause certain
>> modification of entries not replicate to slurp slaves.
>>
>> replica: 180.0.10.2:1234
>> replica: 180.0.10.3:1234
>> time: 1211855467
>> ^^^^^^^^^^ this timestamp
>>
>> How to reproduce the problem:
>> 1) run under very slow machines (my environ: arm 266MHz)
>> 2) slapd is configed to generate replogfile
>> 3) ldapadd about 5 entries, then ldapmodify 2 entries without delay.
>>
>
> This is fixed in RE23. If there is ever a 2.3.43 release, it will be in
> that. In the meantime, I'd advise using 2.3.42 + your patch.
>
> Regards,
> Quanah
>
>
>
> --
>
> Quanah Gibson-Mount
> Principal Software Engineer
> Zimbra, Inc
> --------------------
> Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
>
------=_Part_7580_3624331.1212031000971
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi, Quanah:<br><br>I'm considering upgrading from 2.3 to 2.4.x. I haven't test 2.4.x yet. Does this bug exist in 2.4.x too?<br><br>Regards,<br>Hai<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <<a href="mailto:quanah@zimbra.com";>quanah@zimbra.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">--On Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:10 AM +0000 <a href="mailto:hai.zhao@gmail.com"; target="_blank">hai.zhao@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Full_Name: Zhao Hai<br>
Version: 2.3.41<br>
OS: Linux 2.4.21 arm<br>
URL: <a href="ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/zhaohai-080527.patch"; target="_blank">ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/zhaohai-080527.patch</a><br>
Submission from: (NULL) (<a href="http://205.209.140.4"; target="_blank">205.209.140.4</a>)<br>
<br>
<br>
Problem:<br>
race condition makes incorrect timestamp in replogfile, cause certain<br>
modification of entries not replicate to slurp slaves.<br>
<br>
replica: <a href="http://180.0.10.2:1234"; target="_blank">180.0.10.2:1234</a><br>
replica: <a href="http://180.0.10.3:1234"; target="_blank">180.0.10.3:1234</a><br>
time: 1211855467<br>
^^^^^^^^^^ this timestamp<br>
<br>
How to reproduce the problem:<br>
1) run under very slow machines (my environ: arm 266MHz)<br>
2) slapd is configed to generate replogfile<br>
3) ldapadd about 5 entries, then ldapmodify 2 entries without delay.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
This is fixed in RE23. If there is ever a 2.3.43 release, it will be in that. In the meantime, I'd advise using 2.3.42 + your patch.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Quanah<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
<br>
Quanah Gibson-Mount<br>
Principal Software Engineer<br>
Zimbra, Inc<br>
--------------------<br>
Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_7580_3624331.1212031000971--