Re: lastmod and index corruption
All this time I've been using 4.3 because I couldn't get 4.2 to work with 'set_cachesize 8 0 2'! How embarrassing! Maybe it didn't work until later versions of 4.2 or maybe I'm completely crazy, but now I've definitely got no excuse but to dump 4.3. The question remains, though, of whether to go with 4.4 or 4.2. You've been using 4.4 for a couple of months now, right Quanah? Are there still any outstanding kinks using it with OL 2.3? The performance info you gathered definitely has me looking at OL 2.3 with BDB 4.4 for our next production deployment. On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: >On Wednesday 22 February 2006 11:18, Eric Irrgang wrote: >> I'll be looking at BDB 4.4 for OL 2.3.x but I couldn't get BDB 4.2 to work >> with more than a total of 4 Gigs of db cache. 4.3 changed the limit from >> "4 GB max" to "4 GB per cache segment". Has a patch been backported to >> 4.2 to resolve this limitation? > >I've not had an issue using > 4GB with BDB 4.2.52 under Solaris.. You just >have to use more than one section, like: > >set_cachesize 8 0 2 > >BDB 4.4 has the improvement of allowing you to have very large single >partitions. > >In any case, you use BDB 4.3 at your own risk, as long noted. -- Eric Irrgang - UT Austin ITS Unix Systems - (512)475-9342
Re: lastmod and index corruption
On Wednesday 22 February 2006 11:18, Eric Irrgang wrote: > I'll be looking at BDB 4.4 for OL 2.3.x but I couldn't get BDB 4.2 to work > with more than a total of 4 Gigs of db cache. 4.3 changed the limit from > "4 GB max" to "4 GB per cache segment". Has a patch been backported to > 4.2 to resolve this limitation? I've not had an issue using > 4GB with BDB 4.2.52 under Solaris.. You just have to use more than one section, like: set_cachesize 8 0 2 BDB 4.4 has the improvement of allowing you to have very large single partitions. In any case, you use BDB 4.3 at your own risk, as long noted. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Developer ITS/Shared Application Services Stanford University GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html
Re: lastmod and index corruption
I'll be looking at BDB 4.4 for OL 2.3.x but I couldn't get BDB 4.2 to work with more than a total of 4 Gigs of db cache. 4.3 changed the limit from "4 GB max" to "4 GB per cache segment". Has a patch been backported to 4.2 to resolve this limitation? On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: >How about the obligatory "Don't use BDB 4.3" warning that we've been giving >for a while? :) -- Eric Irrgang - UT Austin ITS Unix Systems - (512)475-9342
Re: lastmod and index corruption
> Incidentally, gentlehup seems to be problematic, too, but I won't go into > that... > Anyway, I hope this helps someone out there who fails to heed the > obligatory "upgrade to 2.3.x" warning. Perhaps you could look into a backport? (Not sure if it'd even be accepted into RE22 at this point, but beauty of open source, you certainly can roll it yourself locally.) (2.3.13) Fixed slapd gentlehup write restrict issue (ITS#3717) Not too much "Fixed" happening in 2.2 lately. Insert obligatory warning here--upgrades are good. (And I'm probably more hosed than anybody with 2.3 at the moment, since I'm apparently the only person experiencing syncrepl choosing to delete things at its discretion, or at least the only person crazy enough to notice and speak up about it :)
Re: lastmod and index corruption
--On Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:43 AM -0600 Eric Irrgang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't see anything directly pertinent in the list archives so I thought I'd share my experience for posterity. Running OpenLDAP 2.2.30 on Solaris 9 with Berkeley DB 4.3.29, I would regularly see cases where indexes would "forget" an entry upon modification, even if the index in question wasn't for an attribute being modified. Interestingly, applying the same modifications to an identical directory would produce identical corruption, but other than that it was totally unpredictable. Anyway, I finally found a correlation with the "lastmod" configuration option which I had turned off. Setting "lastmod on" seems to have solved the problem. Anyway, I hope this helps someone out there who fails to heed the obligatory "upgrade to 2.3.x" warning. How about the obligatory "Don't use BDB 4.3" warning that we've been giving for a while? :) --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Principal Software Developer ITS/Shared Application Services Stanford University GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html
