[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: syncrepl Issues?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luke Howard [mailto:lukeh@PADL.COM]
> Lazy me hasn't checked those ITSs, but one problem I noticed and
> haven't reported is: if you have multiple databases on a replica
> that are subordinate to each other, listed in the usual order of
> deepest first, then the glue records created while synchronizing
> the deeper naming contexts will prevent the superior NC heads
> from being replicated.
> For example, say I am replicating:
> then glue records appear to be created for OU=Melbourne,O=PADL,C=AU
> and O=PADL,C=AU in the process of synchronizing the first two
> databases, which prevent the real organizationalUnit/organization
> entries for those DNs from ever being synchronized.
I must be too tired to understand... Is the provider also split into the same
3 databases, or is it a single database?
If you have a replica whose suffix is OU=Sales,OU=Melbourne,O=PADL,C=AU then
I don't see why it needs a glue record for OU=Melbourne,O=PADL,C=AU at all.
> Also, setting updateref/updatedn (the latter in both the database
> and syncrepl stanzas) does not appear to return a referral to the
> client on writes.
> Both of these issues make replication a non-starter in our
> I don't suppose they will be difficult to fix though :-)
> (I sent some more detail in private mail last week; I'll report
> as an ITS when I am back in Melbourne.)
> -- Luke
> >From: "Howard Chu" <email@example.com>
> >Subject: syncrepl Issues?
> >To: <openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org>
> >Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 02:21:51 -0800
> >There's been quite a lot of bugfixing in syncrepl, but many
> of the ITSs
> >against it are still open. Are these problems really still
> unresolved, or
> >we close a few of them? #2928, #2947, #2948, #2950, #2995.
> > -- Howard Chu
> > Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
> > http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc
> > Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support