[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: 2.3.43, and a variety of problems.

--On Friday, September 18, 2009 7:33 AM -0400 Francis Swasey <Frank.Swasey@uvm.edu> wrote:

On 9/18/09 3:47 AM, Howard Chu wrote:
Brandon Hume wrote:
I don't know whether 2.3.43 is new enough to NOT be told to go to hell,

Nobody would ever tell you that. But 2.3.43 is over a year old and 2.4
has been the stable release for quite a long time. Insisting on using it
is the same as you telling us to go to hell with our bug fixes.

This is getting ridiculous from my perspective.  We've had a rash of
people reporting problems against older releases and being effectively
told to go to hell (which is what we hear when the development team or
some proxy for them tells us to upgrade to 2.4).

Once a release is no longer supported, that's the end of life for it.

2.4 is not "stable" by any definition other than the OpenLDAP project has
designated it so.

I've found the last few releases to be stable. Which is why I'm using 2.4.18 now.

I am still seeing people complaining about syncrepl problems.  So, how
about you developers stop adding all the new wiz-bang bells and whistles
and concentrate on stability and performance?

The problem in this post is one common with syncrepl and is what delta-syncrepl alleviates. I think it is also worth noting that the syncrepl in 2.4 is actually substantially better than the syncrepl in 2.3.

The problems with syncrepl I see people reporting right now have to do with MMR, which is a feature I personally am avoiding until it stabilizes a bit more. But the old single-slave many replica method is definitely better in 2.4 than it was in 2.3. For both normal syncrepl *and* delta-syncrepl.

I.e., if you ignore the wiz-bang features, 2.4 is at this point better than 2.3.

Have you fixed the fact that 2.4 is so much slower than 2.3 as reported
by Quanah two months ago yet?

Fixing the slowness in 2.4 requires writing an entirely new backend. See the discussions on -devel. However, there are things you can do to mitigate the slowness, such as using BDB 4.8.

I'll note that the 2.4 connection manager is actually *faster* than 2.3. The problem is that because of bugs that showed up in the 2.3 release, more locking mechanisms were added to back-hdb/bdb to fix them, and that slowed things down.



Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Engineer
Zimbra, Inc
Zimbra ::  the leader in open source messaging and collaboration