On 05/13/16 14:45, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (12/05/16 15:35), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>> On 05/12/16 13:48, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>
>>> I would like to fix it but I do not know what to fix.
>>>
>>> Is there anything interesting/suspicious in syslog/journald
>>> from the same time?
>>>
>>
>> "jour
On (12/05/16 15:35), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>On 05/12/16 13:48, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> It would be nice if you could provide reliable reproducer.
>> I'm sorry we do not have a crystall ball and sssd log files
>> did not help either. They are truncated.
>>
>
>Thats all I got.
>
and that's the reas
On 05/12/16 13:48, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> It would be nice if you could provide reliable reproducer.
> I'm sorry we do not have a crystall ball and sssd log files
> did not help either. They are truncated.
>
Thats all I got.
> I would like to fix it but I do not know what to fix.
>
> Is there
On (12/05/16 11:03), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>On 05/12/16 10:26, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (12/05/16 09:42), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>>
>>> It happened again :-(.This *really* needs to be fixed.
>>> I wouldn't like to move back to ypbind.
>>>
>> I would like to If I knew what to fix and how to reliab
On 05/12/16 10:26, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (12/05/16 09:42), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>
>> It happened again :-(.This *really* needs to be fixed.
>> I wouldn't like to move back to ypbind.
>>
> I would like to If I knew what to fix and how to reliably reproduce.
>
It would be very nice if sssd c
On (12/05/16 09:42), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>On 02/23/16 13:46, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (23/02/16 13:01), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>> On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
I would rather focus on different thing.
Why is sssd_be process blocked for long time?
>>>
Hi folks,
On 02/23/16 13:46, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (23/02/16 13:01), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>> On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>> I would rather focus on different thing.
>>> Why is sssd_be process blocked for long time?
>>>
>>
>> I have no idea. Was it really blocked?
>>
> It
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 01:48:20PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> On 02/24/2016 09:24 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >
> > Do you have debug_level=N in the [domain] section?
> >
>
> I have set N=5. Is this OK to set global debugging for all
> modules?
Putting the option to the [domain
Hi Jakub,
On 02/24/2016 09:24 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>
> Do you have debug_level=N in the [domain] section?
>
I have set N=5. Is this OK to set global debugging for all
modules? I am used to set something like
debug_level = info
but the man page doesn't tell.
Regards
Harri
--
Man
On (24/02/16 13:45), Torsten Harenberg wrote:
>Hi,
>
>we had some trouble with sssd in the past as well on machines which
>suffer from a high IO load (cluster nodes running scientific calculations).
>
>Following a suggestion from the list here, we moved the local sssd cache
>into a tmpfs, so our fs
Hi,
we had some trouble with sssd in the past as well on machines which
suffer from a high IO load (cluster nodes running scientific calculations).
Following a suggestion from the list here, we moved the local sssd cache
into a tmpfs, so our fstab contains now a
tmpfs /var/lib/sss/db tmpfs s
On (23/02/16 23:50), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>Hi Lukas,
>
>On 02/23/16 13:46, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (23/02/16 13:01), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>> On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
I would rather focus on different thing. Why is sssd_be process blocked
for long time?
>
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:50:10PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi Lukas,
>
> On 02/23/16 13:46, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > On (23/02/16 13:01), Harald Dunkel wrote:
> >> On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >>> I would rather foc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi Lukas,
On 02/23/16 13:46, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (23/02/16 13:01), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>> On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>> I would rather focus on different thing. Why is sssd_be process blocked for
>>> long time?
>>>
>>
On (23/02/16 13:01), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> I would rather focus on different thing.
>> Why is sssd_be process blocked for long time?
>>
>
>I have no idea. Was it really blocked?
>
It needn't be blocked itself. But it was busy
with some non-blocking
On 02/23/2016 11:58 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> I would rather focus on different thing.
> Why is sssd_be process blocked for long time?
>
I have no idea. Was it really blocked?
> Do you use enumeration?
> If yes do you really need it.
Nope.
>
> Workaround might be to increate timeout betwee
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:55:18AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 02/23/2016 10:00 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >
> > Typically, this happens when the machine SSSD is running on is very
> > busy, the sssd_be process is blocked writing some large result from
> > LDAP, the monitor process considers i
On (23/02/16 10:55), Harald Dunkel wrote:
>On 02/23/2016 10:00 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>
>> Typically, this happens when the machine SSSD is running on is very
>> busy, the sssd_be process is blocked writing some large result from
>> LDAP, the monitor process considers it stuck and kills it. Howe
On 02/23/2016 10:00 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>
> Typically, this happens when the machine SSSD is running on is very
> busy, the sssd_be process is blocked writing some large result from
> LDAP, the monitor process considers it stuck and kills it. However, we
> /should/ restart and reconnect the su
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 08:11:58AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 02/22/2016 03:51 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >
> > Is there anything else in the logs (/var/log/sssd/*)
> >
>
> Only some events after sssd went away:
>
> srvvm01:/var/log/sssd# cat sssd.log.1
> (Sun Feb 21 18:02:21 2016) [sssd]
On 02/22/2016 03:51 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>
> Is there anything else in the logs (/var/log/sssd/*)
>
Only some events after sssd went away:
srvvm01:/var/log/sssd# cat sssd.log.1
(Sun Feb 21 18:02:21 2016) [sssd] [monitor_restart_service] (0x0010): Process
[nss], definitely stopped!
srvvm01:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 03:09:51PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> this morning I recognized that the sssd on our mail server
> went away (which is fatal). journalctl -u sssd sssd says
>
> :
> Feb 21 18:01:55 srvvm01.example.com sssd[199]: Killing service [example.com],
> not respond
Hi folks,
this morning I recognized that the sssd on our mail server
went away (which is fatal). journalctl -u sssd sssd says
:
Feb 21 18:01:55 srvvm01.example.com sssd[199]: Killing service [example.com],
not responding to pings!
Feb 21 18:01:55 srvvm01.example.com sssd[199]: Killing service [n
23 matches
Mail list logo
