[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: max open files
I think this falls into the "you get what you pay for..." camp.
On the support page, they list a number of companies that provide
technical support services for OpenLDAP. If the price for stability
is not worth engaging one of them, then you will need to keep your
software up to a revision level that the developers will support.
I am curious what constant issues/bugs are affecting you. Once we
have a working version, it keeps on working and there is no need
to constantly rebuild your software as new releases come out. The
other option that we use here is the 389 Directory server, which
might be an option for you to consider.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 08:46:38AM -0400, Alex McKenzie wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> I'll be honest: while LDAP does what I need it to, and is the only tool
> I've found that works well for my purposes, this is why I'm constantly
> looking for another option. Just about every request for help I see
> come across this list gets an initial response of "Oh, well, you're one
> or two minor versions out of date. You need to update to the newest
> version before we can help you."
> Software that unstable is not, in my view, really suited to a production
> environment. If the OpenLDAP developers -- who, overall, do an
> excellent job -- can't come up with a stable release every six months or
> so, there's a problem. If there are so many major flaws that running a
> month old version means it's unsupportable, that's an even bigger problem.
> I've been following the list for around a year, and I understand the
> difficulties involved in supporting old versions, but the simple fact
> is, most of us don't have time to custom compile all our server
> software. My Ubuntu-default installs of Apache, postfix, SSH, and just
> about everything else work fine and can be supported by their
> developers. It's only LDAP (and a few things in beta) that absolutely
> have to run the newest version at all times. I chose to accept a
> limited feature-set and bullied GnuTLS into working "well enough" for
> our limited LDAP environment, but if I ever find an alternative, I'll be
> moving away from LDAP to whatever that is.
> And please -- nobody take this as an attack. I really do respect the
> OpenLDAP development team, and the people on this list do their best to
> help everyone, even those of us using old versions. I just question the
> long-term viability of a system that needs to be recompiled as often as
> OpenLDAP seems to.
> - -Alex McKenzie
> Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> > --On Tuesday, March 16, 2010 7:21 PM -0300 Matheus Morais
> > <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> Well, IMHO this is a really bad excuse and I was not expecting to hear
> >> that in this list.
> >> Klements,
> >> You can get slapd source packages and change the flags as you want.
> >> Serious distribution packages as Debian packages shouldn't
> >> be discouraged by OpenLDAP dev team as I'm seeing here. Debian packages
> >> policy are very strong and help a lot stable environments to be bug-free
> >> from recent less stable versions. I use Debian as a protection from that
> >> too early versions who can potentially threat my production environment
> >> and I was very successful with Debian packages in this attempt.
> >> You can also look for support on Debian IRC channels and lists.
> > Hi Matheus,
> > I'll note that article was written by one of the Debian openldap package
> > maintainers. And it is quite correct that anyone wanting to run a
> > *stable* OpenLDAP production environment should most definitely *not*
> > use the ones provided by most Linux OS providers, *particularly*
> > Debian/Ubuntu. The reasons why this is the case have been hashed over
> > many, many times. Particularly, the use of GnuTLS which is horribly
> > broken being one of the major reasons. The fact that they are not kept
> > up to date with current stable releases is another.
> > --Quanah
> > --
> > Quanah Gibson-Mount
> > Principal Software Engineer
> > Zimbra, Inc
> > --------------------
> > Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----