Pierangelo Masarati wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>> >>>>> The above log was generated using the test050 script just adding a line >>>>> which >>>>> enters information also to a second server. Perhaps this test would also >>>>> make >>>>> sense for further releases. >>>> Can you please post the modification to the script? >>> Never mind, I could reproduce it. It seems to be a duplicate of >>> ITS#5437. What actually happens is that if modifications are applied to >>> all three servers, those applied to consumers do not persist, nor get >>> replicated; on the contrary, the consumers crash later on as described >>> in ITS#5437. >> #5437? What you're talking about doesn't seem to match any text in ITS#5437. > > Well, sorry for not providing more details, I was going to investigate > it a little bit more but I had to leave. The crash to me occurs in > syncprov_done_ctrl(), as indicated in ITS#5437. What happens is that > syncprov_done_ctrl() with an invalid cookie (unset; clearing it in > syncprov_search_response(), as suggested in ITS#5437 leads to the > behavior I described (writes to consumers are simply ignored, don't > persist in the consumers and are not replicated). To reproduce, add > something to a consumer close to the end of test050, before killing the > servers, and wait a little bit to let things proceed to the crash.
OK, I've reproduced the crash and patched it in HEAD, and added a consumer write to the test050 script. Please test. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
