Michael:
OpenLDAP to sync. Even at that point, when this xen machine goes into
production we have to, as much as possible, stick with maintainable RPM
packages that are vendor supported. I've maintained servers using
source tarballs before. It's not fun.
Rolling your own packages is sort of a requirement, even in this day and
age of binary packages. OS vendors can't possibly stay on top of all of
the different releases of the various packages out there, and so they
are frequently behind and/or broken. Red Hat's OL packages are
definitely broken.
Although it takes a bit of effort, dealing with compiling from source is
NOT hard. If you want everything to live in a package management system
such as RPM, you just have to take an extra hour or so and throw
together a .spec file that works for you. If you prefer to not use a
package system for things that you compile, then there are several
techniques that allow you to keep that clean as well.
Regarding your Xen plan -- virtualization definitely makes servers
easier to manage, as you don't need to worry nearly as much about
library versioning etc. Xen is cool, but relatively heavyweight as it
is still a full virtualization stack. I've had good success with, and
recommend you look at, the Linux V-Server project at
http://linux-vserver.org. I am successfully running almost all of my
services inside of vservers (including the latest stable OpenLDAP), and
am a much happier sysadmin for it.
Good luck,
--
Joseph Dickson
Unix Administrator - WEYCO, INC. | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 800.748.0003 ext 1216
Howard Chu wrote:
Michael Torrie wrote:
On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 23:43 -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
I'm assuming by a "dbm" backend, you mean ldbm. Of course, ldbm is
not recommended for use, because of its many problems. Honestly, if
you are looking to run a directory service, I would highly advise
you dump Xen, and use something where BDB is supported (and I'd
suggest running OpenLDAP 2.3.20 (or higher, if newer releases have
been made by the time you get to it)).
Unfortunately 2.3.20 is not an option. This xen server (which is not in
production at this moment) syncs (or will sync) using slurpd off of our
production servers which are all 2.2, and cannot be changed until the
next hardware/OS upgrade cycle.
2.3.20 will accept slurpd updates from a 2.2 server.
I will be getting the syncrep stuff
going soon which I understand will can allow two different versions of
In general, if you want RPMs that are actually supported by a vendor
then you should look into www.symas.com's CDS downloads.
Of course, we haven't looked into the Xen problems yet. I feel it's
still premature; VMware on the other hand is a no-brainer.
