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

Re: Slaves taking up 100% cpu





--On Tuesday, January 20, 2004 7:44 PM +0200 Buchan Milne <bgmilne@obsidian.co.za> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tony Earnshaw wrote:
tir, 20.01.2004 kl. 11.53 skrev Buchan Milne:

RedHat is also shipping 2.1.22 as the alternative to 2.0.27. As far as
Openldap and RedHat go, RedHat verges on the conservative. Catch 22:


So that makes 3 large distros the OpenLDAP team has failed to communicate the severity of the problems with 2.1.22 to?

Umm... Is it really the responsibility of OpenLDAP to communicate to them? Shouldn't they instead be subscribed to the *official* channel (openldap-announce@openldap.org), so they are aware of new releases and state changes?



There is *no* stable release of Openldap software. As soon as a release
has been proved as being stable, it is then judged (Quanah ;) as being
no longer supported (me, I'm an experimental person, so what the heck?
There's money to be earned on it).

<sarcasm>OK, so we should ditch openldap, and find an alternative which will support stable releases???</sarcasm>

No software company or product that I know of, will simply state that product A is stable and supported if you do not have the most recent patches applied to that product. I the problem here is that you are looking at releases in a different sense than I do. OpenLDAP-2.1.25 is OpenLDAP-2.1.22 plus 3 patch sets, basically. And it is what is stable.




Sorry, but if there are *known* stability problems (yes, I saw problems on a 2.1.22 slave, but no longer have access to it and couldn't debug it at the time) it is only reasonable for them to be clearly visible.

Subscribe to the OpenLDAP-announce list so you can read the release announcements. It lists what bugs were fixed in previous releases, and you can even go and *read* what those fixes were for (imagine that!).




Be that as is may, what the Openldap site *actually* (at the moment) says is:

        The OpenLDAP Software Stable release is the last release which
        has proven through general use to be the most stable release
        available. OpenLDAP-2.1.25, as of 20031217, is considered
        stable.


And 2 months ago it said the same of 2.1.22, but that statement has not been retracted, so are we to assume (without any other information) that 2.1.22 is stable, or not?

Umm... Again, subscribe to the OpenLDAP-announce list. Every time what is considered "stable" is changed, it is posted there. Your failure to be a part of the *officially maintained channel of communication* is not their fault.



Howard Chu has posted on this list, that 2.1.26 is on the boil,
presumably because of bugs in 2.1.25.

So?

So you might want to pay attention...


The Openldap project seems to render a product in constant development.
No single Internet service seems to have as many IETF rfcs devoted to
it, of which the number is constantly increasing, other than smtp
e-mail. Witness the constant stream of Postfix and Exim releases (forget
Qmail and Sendmail).
So is everyone who runs openldap on production machines supposed to
subscribe to all the mailing lists? I run a lot of other software in
production, for which I don't need to subscribe to the lists to have a
stable system ...

Again, openldap-announce and read the bug fixes. That isn't a whole lot, and it is a low volume list.


--Quanah

--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Developer
ITSS/TSS/Computing Systems
ITSS/TSS/Infrastructure Operations
Stanford University
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html