[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: alock + ldbm in 2.3.21
--On Wednesday, April 12, 2006 4:10 PM -0400 matthew sporleder
> Apr 11 15:21:22 labogldir02 slapd: [ID 658149 local6.debug]
> ldbm_back_db_open: alock package is unstable; database may be
> Apr 11 15:21:22 labogldir02 slapd: [ID 100111 local6.debug]
> slapd starting
> Can I get a status on alock for LDBM?
> According to:
> ic= 1&sortbydate=0
> it looks like ldbm is having some alock rethinks. Should I wait for
> ldbm to be re-stabilized in 2.3.x?
LDBM is going to be removed from OpenLDAP 2.4, and there are many reasons
not to use LDBM (stability, etc). I would rethink why you are using LDBM
in the first place (not that the problem you are reporting doesn't need
to be addressed).
The reason I'm using LDBM is that I can migrate my servers to 2.3
-very quickly- by sticking with the same backend as I was using in
Basically, my procedure was:
install binaries, run db_upgrade, start slapd. (takes about two minutes)
Is this error because my database directories did not contain the
'alock' file when I started up? I saw that 'alock' was created when I
I can do some testing on this once my slamd run is finished tomorrow,
but I would appreciate some direction.
How large is your database?
If it is not absolutely huge, it should be fairly quick to load it using
slapadd -q, and if you have a multiple CPU system, you can use the
multi-threaded nature of slapadd in 2.3 to speed it up even more (see the
tool-threads directive). This is all assuming you are using BDB of course.
I would really rethink using LDBM, especially since you are upgrading to a
modern version of OpenLDAP.
Now that you've started slapd, and alock is created, does LDBM continue to
complain, or are things happy?
Principal Software Developer
ITS/Shared Application Services
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html