[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Some openldap 2.4 questions
Radosław Antoniuk wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 2:01 AM, Howard Chu <email@example.com
> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote:
> Radosław Antoniuk wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Three quick issues about slapd 2.4.
> > 1. I'm setting up a syncrepl replication. In the process of
> testing, I had
> > added three syncprov overlays instead of one, and I ended up with:
> > The thing is, that I cannot delete any of them because cn=config
> does not
> > support delete operation.
> > Is this ok to leave it as is? or any workaround to get rid of the
> unwanted ones?
> Since it's just a test installation, your best action is to delete
> it all and
> start over with the correct LDIF.
> > 2. About N-Way replication... What's the best authentication to
> use? Because
> > (1) RootDN is the admin, and (2) in simple authentication I would
> store cleartext
> > password in the syncrepl configuration, I'm assuming that (3) the
> best here would
> > be to use some SASL mech?
> What do any of these 3 points have to do with each other, let alone
> with N-way
> > 3. Assuming a running normal replication(master-slave) with
> > is there any method of checking of the status of the replication?
> like show
> > slave status in MySQL. I have tested it with cutting the
> transmission by
> > iptables, and ok, it caught up after reconnection, but the master
> did not
> > complain at all when the connection was not there...
> If you had read the docs
> you wouldn't need to ask such questions.
> None of the answers was valid actually.
> If I could start all over, I wouldn't ask, right?
> What it has to do ? It has to do the fact that in this kind of
> replication you are replicating cn=config as well, which usually in
> other kinds is not the case.
> And yes, I read the link you mentioned, hint: the word "status" shows up
> there three times in one sentence that does *not* mention anything about
> external checking of LDAP replication status.
> Ergo, if you don't want to help, don't frustrate the asker :)
I agree. Howard's response was an unwarranted RTFM. If you don't want to
help another subscriber on this list, please don't reply. Helpless
replies are not constructive.