[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#5809) syncrepl + back-ldif + "rename to same DN" fails
> email@example.com wrote:
>> Full_Name: Hallvard B Furuseth
>> Version: HEAD
>> OS: Linux
>> Submission from: (NULL) (220.127.116.11)
>> Submitted by: hallvard
>> With the latest back-ldif/ldif.c (rev 1.99),
>> ./run -b ldif test048-syncrepl-multiproxy
>> breaks with "master and P1 slave databases differ" and
>> ./run -b ldif test018-syncreplication-persist
>> when patched to not reject $BACKEND = ldif
>> breaks with "producer and consumer databases differ".
>> The offender is "rename to same DN" (ITS#5319), i.e. rev 1.99.
>> Unless there is a big "duh!" in it, it exposed a syncrepl bug.
> Yes, thanks. The consumer assumed that an entry being renamed would have no
> other modifications associated with it. This assumption is wrong. There are no
> rename ops in test018, but apparently back-ldif is not returning the RDN with
> the same case as the original entry, so syncrepl assumes a rename (that only
> changed letter case) was done.
> Still looking at the fix.
This is mostly fixed in HEAD. The diff still doesn't compare because some cn
values are in the wrong order. I think you need to check what back-ldif is
doing that triggers the false detection of a rename op.
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/