Mark
On 2/23/21 1:40 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
since a long time I was trying to build rpms and failed, here are the issues I
run into:
1] problem with npm/audit
I followed the suggestions here:
https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/contributing.html (pushd/npm fix/popd), but
this didn't
Hi,
since a long time I was trying to build rpms and failed, here are the
issues I run into:
1] problem with npm/audit
I followed the suggestions here:
https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/contributing.html (pushd/npm
fix/popd), but this didn't help, only commenting out audit-ci in
On 19.10.20 01:26, William Brown wrote:
On 16 Oct 2020, at 17:48, Pierre Rogier wrote:
Hi William,
I agree with your architecture points and that is why I said my proposal is a
less appealing trade off.
My real concern is your last point:
we just do not know and IMHO we are unable to
changing something that has
been "working" for a long time :)
> On 14 Oct 2020, at 19:47, Ludwig Krispenz mailto:krisp...@t-online.de>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> you are right that it is possible to configure suffix
hierarchies which are broken, but i
Hi,
you are right that it is possible to configure suffix hierarchies which
are broken, but in my experience this wasn't an issue. people using sub
suffixes did get it right.
So is there really a need to change something that is working for a long
time ?
Regards,
Ludwig
On 14.10.20
On 31.08.20 02:33, William Brown wrote:
On 28 Aug 2020, at 19:23, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 27.08.20 04:01, William Brown wrote:
Hey there,
I'm seeing some odd behaviour in an import test. I'm seeing that a large number
of entries won't import unless the directory is restarted before
On 27.08.20 04:01, William Brown wrote:
Hey there,
I'm seeing some odd behaviour in an import test. I'm seeing that a large number
of entries won't import unless the directory is restarted before the import
task is performed.
The error appears to be:
[25/Aug/2020:14:14:58.973490600 +1000]
, William Brown wrote:
On 1 Apr 2020, at 01:04, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
I was away and am late in the discussion, maybe too late.
Not too late, it's not released in production yet ;). There are two PR's that
have been discussed here:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50988
https
Hi,
I was away and am late in the discussion, maybe too late.
In my understanding what you mean by "generic" is that for a new
rewriter you do not need a plugin, but to provide some rewrite functions
and specify them in a rewriters config entry. But there is still the
need to write rewriter
Hi,
I have no expertise in this area, but would like to get also Alexander's
opinion and view from IPA
Regards,
Ludwig
On 03/03/2020 10:17 AM, thierry bordaz wrote:
On 3/3/20 4:12 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 3 Mar 2020, at 11:18, William Brown wrote:
On 3 Mar 2020, at 04:32,
On 02/06/2020 12:57 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 5 Feb 2020, at 20:08, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 02/05/2020 10:53 AM, thierry bordaz wrote:
On 2/5/20 2:30 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 5 Feb 2020, at 03:10, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
I think I can agree with 1-8, 9 is one solution to fix
On 02/05/2020 10:53 AM, thierry bordaz wrote:
On 2/5/20 2:30 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 5 Feb 2020, at 03:10, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
I think I can agree with 1-8, 9 is one solution to fix the problem
you reported, but not yet validate that there are no other side
effects
I think I can agree with 1-8, 9 is one solution to fix the problem you
reported, but not yet validate that there are no other side effects,
there are potential postop plugins which should NOT be called for
tombstone delete, eg retro cl, we need to investigate side effects of
the patch and
Hi,
I agree with you that calls to pre and post should be balance, but not
sure if your approach is the correct one. There is a condition for post
"!delete_tombstone_entries" which prevented the call for postop plugins
in case of the deletion of a tombstone entry. Your patch now ensures
that
Hi William,
I think Harald was asking how to extend an existing deployment with a
plugin, not to build a new plugin into the core. Just use it with a
standard build.
Unfortunately our plugin guide is a bit old and the example plugins are
no longer installed with the server. The best you
On 11/14/2019 12:17 PM, William Brown wrote:
On 14 Nov 2019, at 19:06, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 11/14/2019 09:29 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 14 Nov 2019, at 18:22, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi William,
before further thinking about this, I need some clarification, or maybe I just
missed
On 11/14/2019 09:29 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 14 Nov 2019, at 18:22, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi William,
before further thinking about this, I need some clarification, or maybe I just
missed this. When you talk about 1..16 threads do you mean worker threads ?
Server worker threads
Hi William,
before further thinking about this, I need some clarification, or maybe
I just missed this. When you talk about 1..16 threads do you mean worker
threads ? Or concurrent client connection threads in ldclt/rsearch/
- how many concurrent connections do you have and how does
Hi William,
I like your radical approach :-)
In my opinion our connection code is getting to complicated by
maintaining two different implementations in parallel - not separated,
but intermangled (and even more complicated by turbo mode). So I agree
we should have only one, but which one ?
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50523
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham, Michael O'Neill, Eric
Shander
Hi Mark,
On 06/11/2019 08:15 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
I am currently working on a revision of replication agreement status
messages. Previously we logged the status like so:
Error (%d) - message (sub-message) ...
just to get it clear what you suggest, I was a bit confused about first.
On 05/17/2019 12:44 AM, William Brown wrote:
I think this would be a "final goal", so to formalise the stages:
* Add build tooling and a simple (dummy) log thread as a "getting started".
Supplement with documentation on wiki.
* Fill-in the log thread to support an "operation log", and add
On 05/16/2019 02:56 AM, William Brown wrote:
Replying to both Simon and Ludwig in the one mail ...
To just comment to one point from Ludwig:
This may sound too negative, I agree that logging deserves attention and
improvement, but we need to agree on what we want to achieve.
I don't think
On 05/07/2019 02:08 PM, William Brown wrote:
On 7 May 2019, at 22:03, Viktor Ashirov wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 6:48 AM William Brown wrote:
On 29 Apr 2019, at 12:33, Anuj Borah wrote:
@William Brown
Thanks for the tip!
(Pdb) len(topo.standalone.search_s(DEFAULT_SUFFIX,
On 04/03/2019 03:24 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
On 4/3/19 9:01 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
added some small comments, but it is overall ok.
I'll review them shortly :-)
Just thinking about it, wouldn't it be an option that the task entry
survives until it is completed and written
Hi,
added some small comments, but it is overall ok.
Just thinking about it, wouldn't it be an option that the task entry
survives until it is completed and written to the dse.ldif at shutdown,
so at startup tasks could be resumed from the task entry not from params
in the repl entry ?
On 02/26/2019 04:42 PM, Matus Honek wrote:
This kinda leads me to thinking we should implement ACIs management
within the DSLdapObjects like this (probably specific to a particular
subclass, to a degree). One that would take care of this added
requirement for objectclass ACIs because of hidden
Hi, I need a bit of time to read the docs and clear my thoughts, but one
comment below
On 02/25/2019 01:49 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 23 Feb 2019, at 02:46, Mark Reynolds wrote:
I want to start a brief discussion about a major problem we have backend
transaction plugins and the entry
On 02/11/2019 08:35 AM, William Brown wrote:
On 11 Feb 2019, at 17:01, Anuj Borah wrote:
Hi,
As 'Entry' is not allowed to use now , In replace of Entry we are suggested to
use UserAccounts and UserAccount which is very limited to some object classes .
On 01/17/2019 09:57 AM, Anuj Borah wrote:
Hay William.
Here i am not using nsUserAccount in nsUserAccountRole as it
requires 'uid' which is not allowed in nsFilteredRoleDefinition and
nsRoleDefinition . Below are usages:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49551
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/e81577a307fc6e719e96776f355181223a7e58470157de7fb12326e705081ed9-0001-Ticket-49551-v2-correct-handling-of-numsubordinates-.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
On 01/10/2018 07:03 AM, William Brown wrote:
If I have:
(targetattr=x)(version 3.0; allow(read, search)(groupdn=cn=x);)
If cn=x has member cn=y, and cn=y member uid=z
Does uid=z have permission to the targetattr here? IE do our aci's work
through nested groups?
yes, they should, but
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49493
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/d368eb763847fbabddf8bc9b474259e6443e9184db7254eb5c2a27584cae40d5-0001-Ticket-49493-heap-use-after-free-in-csn_as_string.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49443
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/cdc2c0bf853fbc119c61befc5496efe73845353f1b86365eb70f605d5fc214e5-0001-Ticket-49443-scope-one-searches-in-1.3.7-give-incorr.patch
Note: the testcase passes in master, but I think it is masked by another
This is a patch for 1.3.6, 1.3.7 has the new repl conflict code and the
issue doesn't exist there.
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49431
Hi,
this patch contains a script to remove the config entry on upgrade, but
Alexander says on f26 it isn't called. any idea ?
Ludwig
On 07/12/2017 09:48 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49038
I think this error
*
**Could not open the LDIF template file
'\''/usr/share/dirsrv/data/template-pampta.ldif'\''. Error: No such file or
directory*
points to the changes in https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49371
On 09/06/2017 06:37 AM, marey...@redhat.com wrote:
See
On 08/22/2017 01:31 AM, William Brown wrote:
I have a question / concern though. I thought that we want dbscan 2
ldif for emergency recovery scenarios when all else has gone bad and
assuming that id2entry is still readable. In the approach you
described we make the assumption that the parentid
Hi,
Ilias' proposal follows the db2ldif approach and I think it will work,
even if it might need some tweaks to handle multiple out of order oparents.
An other option would be to follow the total update approach using the
parentid index and direct get from id2entry.
You start with the suffix
On 08/04/2017 02:08 PM, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
Okay, now that I have read and understood dbscan's code, I have a few
more questions.
2017-08-03 10:10 GMT+03:00 Ludwig Krispenz <lkris...@redhat.com
<mailto:lkris...@redhat.com>>:
Hi, now that I know the context here are some m
On 08/02/2017 09:12 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
On 08/02/2017 02:19 PM, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
I see now, thank you both very much!
Follow-up:
[1] Get entry from id2entry and use its ID
[2] Look in entryrdn for the parent of the ID
[3] Keep looking for parents, building the DN
Hi,
I think this is a problem of dbscan, which tries to prettyprint the
entryrdn index and seems to loop a bit.
If you do
db_dump -d a entryrdn.db
you get the raw contents of the file , and you get much fewer records.
Ludwig
On 08/02/2017 05:49 PM, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
Hello,
I would
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49334
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/ce2d76220df07c7142ec745496ebb763f28e174f5a698f4948f770b6417c1ae8-0001-Ticket-49334-fix-backup-restore-if-changelog-exists.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49091
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/5a346dfe553aebcc5d3a637200659ee42c0b7aff83c75ba5bdb39fbc22a8ac80-0001-remove-usage-of-changelog-semaphore.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register:
here is a revised patch, integrating Williams comments and a
contribution by Thierry
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/6d855f63e2e6968692eb06332c322aedbdc3e528232e63881344077864be75ec-0001-Ticket-49287-v3-extend-csnpl-handling-to-multiple-ba.patch
On 07/05/2017 01:02 PM, Ludwig Krispenz
On 07/07/2017 03:17 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
On 07/07/2017 04:44 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 07/07/2017 07:10 AM, William Brown wrote:
Any thoughts or objections on the above would be welcome.
The only problem with going to a queue is if the server goes down
unexpectedly
On 07/07/2017 10:44 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 07/07/2017 07:10 AM, William Brown wrote:
Any thoughts or objections on the above would be welcome.
The only problem with going to a queue is if the server goes down
unexpectedly. In such a case those RI updates would be lost.
We already
On 07/07/2017 07:10 AM, William Brown wrote:
Any thoughts or objections on the above would be welcome.
The only problem with going to a queue is if the server goes down
unexpectedly. In such a case those RI updates would be lost.
We already have this issue because there is a delay between
ticket:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49287
design:
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/csn-pending-lists-and-ruv-update.html
fix:
Hi everybody,
here is the result of my work on replication conflicts. I would like you
to review and comment. I know that given the complexity of the problem
and the volume of teh patches this is not an easy task - I'm sure there
is need for further clarification and correction, but I think I
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49238
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/bd73120782642da0733daa91ab812c1765912ccc52ff1f017aaa852b5480aca4-0001-ticket-49238-AddressSanitizer-heap-use-after-free-in.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Well, I'm not at the position to insist anything any more here :p,
your comments and suggestions and requests are still very welcome and
needed, independent of your "position". For me it is such a pity to see
you leaving the team and I hope you will still find some time to help us
and give
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/49008
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/49008/ticket49008_test.py
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/49008/0001-Ticket-49008-aborted-operation-can-leave-RUV-in-inco.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat:
On 11/21/2016 02:17 AM, William Brown wrote:
Hi,
I have to add some new getters to pblock.c, but I think we should talk
about how to add these.
Right now, we have a nearly ~2000 line case switch statement in
slapi_pblock_get(pb, TYPE, *void). No matter how we cut it, this is
pretty insane. We
On 11/04/2016 06:51 AM, William Brown wrote:
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/autotuning.html
I would like to hear discussion on this topic.
thread number:
independent of number of cpus I would have a default minmum number of
threads,
your test result for reduced thread number is
t's
wait for CU cases to see if we need to also address internal ops.
regards
thierry
On 10/07/2016 05:58 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
there is a problem not yet covered in the proposal: setting the
backend to "referral-on-update" until the topology is in sync
prevents to ealry c
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48133
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48133/0001-Ticket-48133-v2-Non-tombstone-entry-which-dn-startin.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/49009
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/49009/0001-Ticket-49009-args-debug-logging-must-be-more-restric.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing
ion on how to handle
this
thanks,
Ludwig
On 10/05/2016 05:51 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 09/30/2016 02:15 AM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
Hi Ludwig,
On 09/29/2016 05:43 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
This is the initial proposal, thanks for your feedback
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/delay
On 09/30/2016 02:15 AM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
Hi Ludwig,
On 09/29/2016 05:43 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
This is the initial proposal, thanks for your feedback
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/delay-accepting-updates-after-init.html
Please help me understanding the design...
I'm
This is the initial proposal, thanks for your feedback
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/delay-accepting-updates-after-init.html
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles
Hi Thierry,
the description in the commit is now fine, but given that the choice of
LDAP_CONSTRAINT_VIOLATION is a bit arbitrary it would be good to have a
comment where it is set, explaining why this error code was used.
About which error code to choose, if you have to pick one of the errors
Hi,
here is the latest correction to the changelog fix, in fact it is
Thierry's version of teh fix which simplified the logic a bit
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48766/0001-PATCH-use-a-consumer-maxcsn-only-as-anchor-if-suppli.patch
Ludwig
On 05/23/2016 03:06 PM, Ludwig
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48402/0001-provide-backend-dir-in-suffix-template.patch
On 08/24/2016 05:51 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
This is a heads up, Mark found that the commit of the patch for #48402
breaks new installs with setup-ds.pl.
I don't understand why, looks like
001
From: Ludwig Krispenz <lkris...@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 17:34:11 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] handle cases when import file cannot be generated
---
ldap/servers/slapd/back-ldbm/dblayer.c | 11 ++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/ldap/servers/s
Hi William,
On 08/19/2016 02:22 AM, William Brown wrote:
On Wed, 2016-08-17 at 14:53 +1000, William Brown wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48951
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48951/0001-Ticket-48951-dsadm-and-dsconf-base-files.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48954
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48954/0001-Ticket-48954-replication-fails-because-anchorcsn-can.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing
case, but we
should keep it in mind
Ludwig
On 06/30/2016 11:53 PM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
On 06/30/2016 12:45 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi William,
the reason that after a total init the consumer does not have the
latest state of the supplier RUV and is receiving updates based on
the RUV
On 07/04/2016 01:32 AM, William Brown wrote:
It's not the "post init" operations I'm worried about.
It's that operations that were part of the init to the consumer are
replayed from the changelog.
Operations that occurred after the init starts, definitely still need to
be replayed, and this
On 07/01/2016 04:08 AM, William Brown wrote:
On Thu, 2016-06-30 at 14:53 -0700, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
On 06/30/2016 12:45 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi William,
the reason that after a total init the consumer does not have the
latest state of the supplier RUV and is receiving updates based
Hi William,
the reason that after a total init the consumer does not have the
latest state of the supplier RUV and is receiving updates based on the
RUV at start of the total init is independent of the modrdn problem.
When a supplier is performing a total init it is still accepting
changes,
i also addressed the case of online import, which came up in the
discussion during review.
Can you please review again:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48402/0001-Ticket-48402-v3-allow-plugins-to-detect-a-restore-or.patch
Thanks,
Ludwig
On 02/17/2016 02:12 PM, Ludwig Krispenz
On 06/20/2016 05:55 PM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
On 06/20/2016 02:20 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
I have a question about your tombstone entry... You are using
entrydn instead of entryrdn?
no, sorry for the confusion, I was using ldapsearch to get teh
tombstones, not dbscan
Hmmm, if that's the case
On 06/17/2016 09:16 PM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
On 06/17/2016 08:49 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 06/17/2016 05:31 PM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
On 06/17/2016 12:17 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi Noriko,
I still have a doubt on your fix. You now base the entries to be
sent only on the parentid index
I added some clarifications to the ticket and here is a lib389 test case
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48366/0001-add-testcase-for-ticket-48366-proxyauth-for-root.patch
On 02/16/2016 03:35 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48366
https
On 06/17/2016 02:36 PM, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 06/17/2016 08:42 AM, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 06/17/2016 03:05 AM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48755
Hi German,
you are right that IPA is on the safe side, they maintain the last used
replicaID and when creating a server instance only a higher replicaid is
used, also when a server is removed, the removal triggers a cleanallruv,
either from the script or by the topology plugin (>4.3).
This is
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48275
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48275/0001-Ticket-48275-correctly-handle-or-filters-with-compon.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48275/0002-testcase-for-ticket-48275.patch
The fix passes the ported TET filter test and
On 05/24/2016 07:00 PM, thierry bordaz wrote:
On 05/24/2016 05:24 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
On 05/24/2016 04:20 PM, thierry bordaz wrote:
Hi Ludwig,
Thanks for your explanation. The design looks very good. I think it
would be good to put into the code (especially
09:22 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Hi,
On 05/23/2016 06:29 PM, thierry bordaz wrote:
On 05/23/2016 03:06 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
This is the latest version of the "changelog buffer processing" fixes.
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48766
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment
Hi,
here is my current state of porting the TET filter suite,
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48069
After getting there I think it can probably be simplified, but before
just going to change things I like to get your feedback and suggestions
for improvements
Some issues I have:
- in the
Hi,
On 05/23/2016 06:29 PM, thierry bordaz wrote:
On 05/23/2016 03:06 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
This is the latest version of the "changelog buffer processing" fixes.
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48766
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48766/0001-rewor
This is the latest version of the "changelog buffer processing" fixes.
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48766
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48766/0001-reworked-clcach-buffer-code-following-design-at-http.patch
The background for the fix is here, I would like to get
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48759
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48759/0001-add-testcase-for-ticket-48759.patch
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48759/0001-Ticket-48759-no-plugin-calls-in-tombstone-purging.patch
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/,
-to-detect-a-restore-or.patch
On 02/02/2016 04:53 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Please review ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48402
Updated design page:
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/detect-startup-after-import-or-restore.html
Patch:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment
what do you want to achieve, do you want to do client authentication via
a certificate ?
you have to provide configuration info in ldap.conf or .ldaprc or
environment variables, so that the openldap libs built with nss can
access the client certificate, it has to be in a nss database.
with
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48366
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48366/0001-Ticket-48366-proxyauth-does-not-work-bound-as-direct.patch
--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@%(host_name)s
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Please review ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48402
Updated design page:
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/detect-startup-after-import-or-restore.html
Patch:
On 01/13/2016 11:59 PM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
On 01/13/2016 02:34 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
On 01/13/2016 10:01 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
Ticket 48380 requires that sync repl handles database
reinitializations properly, to be able to determine if cookies are
presented are valid.
To achieve
On 01/14/2016 04:08 PM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
On 01/14/2016 09:42 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
We had many issues with the retro changelog plugin. The main reason
is that the retro CL is a separate backend and if there is more than
one regular backend it is easy to run into deadlocks, eg
Hi,
to have my suggestion discussed by a wider audience, please have a look:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48341
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48341/0001-Ticket-48341-deadlock-on-connection-mutex.patch
Ludwig
--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@%(host_name)s
Ticket 48380 requires that sync repl handles database reinitializations
properly, to be able to determine if cookies are presented are valid.
To achieve this plugins need to be able to detcet if the database is
imported or restored and this is tarcked in ticket 48402.
Before implementing a
Hi Thierry,
we already had started to discuss on IRC, but here are my thoughts again.
Is it necessary to explicitely set the txn in the plugin ? The txn will
be found when ldbm_back_delete() does dblayer_txn_begin(9 and it checks
the per thread stack of txns.
In my opinion the real problem is
Thanks for this, it not only fixes a memory leak but also a regression.
with the previous version of the fix after the processing of the first
tombstone nstombstone_vals was set an duse in deciding what to index :-)
On 08/28/2015 02:19 AM, Noriko Hosoi wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48258
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48258/0001-Ticket-48258-dna-plugin-needs-to-handle-binddn-group.patch
--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
you can use:
slapi_operation_is_flag_set(pb-pb_op, OP_FLAG_INTERNAL);
or
slapi_op_internal(pb)
Ludwig
On 08/03/2015 08:35 AM, William Brown wrote:
Hi,
I can see that in a plugin we can determine if the operation is a replicate
operation with:
int is_repl = 0;
slapi_pblock_get(pb,
This fix should resolve a crash if the fix for BDB is not available for
a specific BDB version
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48149
fix:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48149/0001-Ticket-48149-ns-slapd-double-free-or-corruption-cras.patch
test:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48175
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48175/0001-Ticket-48175-Avoid-using-regex-in-ACL-if-possible.patch
--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
next try to address Mark's comments:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48136/0001-Ticket-48136-v2v2-accept-auxilliary-objectclasse-in-.patch
On 03/30/2015 02:09 PM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48136
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48136
https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48136/0001-Ticket-48136-accept-auxilliary-objectclasse-in-repli.patch
--
389-devel mailing list
389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
