[Date Prev][Date Next]
2.3.39 vs 2.3.40 (as Re: (ITS#5354) slapd repeatedly hangs and stops reponding)
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: 2.3.39 vs 2.3.40 (as Re: (ITS#5354) slapd repeatedly hangs and stops reponding)
- From: Buchan Milne <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:54:44 +0200
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Content-disposition: inline
- In-reply-to: <200802080135.m181Zscw070053@boole.openldap.org>
- References: <200802080135.m181Zscw070053@boole.openldap.org>
- User-agent: KMail/1.9.7
On Friday 08 February 2008 03:35:54 email@example.com wrote:
> --On Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:13 PM -0500 Oren Laadan
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > will fix the symbols now. thanks.
> > as for the patch, it seems unrelated as it fixes a problem during the
> > start-up of the daemon; also, it's for 2.4.7, and I just downgraded
> > back to 2.4.49 (which I was using originally). the decision to move
> > up was because I hoped that the problem would disappear when using a
> > more recent version of openldap. as it turns out, it didn't :(
> There's no such thing as 2.4.49. I assume you mean 2.3.40? Or 2.3.39? I
> would use 2.3.40 over 2.3.39
"While ITS#5342 is still being investigated, I would recommend that everyone
use 2.3.39 and not 2.3.40. Sorry for the trouble."
ITS#5342 is still open, and while the last two followups seem to indicate that
the corruption was not the fault of 2.3.40 ... I'm planning an upgrade for
this weekend (from 2.3.34 for one set of servers, and from 2.3.11 for
another), and thus far I'm hoping to run with 2.3.39 with most fixes in
2.3.40 (plus #5358's fix), but not the dn2id lock fix ...
Maybe I should make provision for an export/import during my upgrade?