Hi,
I've encountered issues with a MMR setup, which looks like the following:
A --- B
\ /
\ /
\ /
C
The replication works for approximately 24 hours. There are not many changes to
the content anyway. After about 1 day, the
I use 1.2.8.2
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:18 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] MMR issue ...
On 11/13/2012 09:24 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I’ve
that be the issue?
-Reinhard
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 1:15 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] MMR issue ...
On 11/13/2012 11:02 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Rich
Has somebody seen this problem as well?
-Reinhard
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 2:51 PM
To: 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: [389-users] MMR issue
Hi,
I
to push updates from one server to others, then please consider using
multi-master connections and hub server (look in red hat docs for more details)
Greg.
2012/8/7 Reinhard Nappert rnapp...@juniper.netmailto:rnapp...@juniper.net
Has somebody seen this problem as well?
-Reinhard
From:
389-users
Hi,
I have the following 389 DS version deployed: 389-Directory/1.2.8.2
B2011.130.190
I have a 3 box multi-master replication setup in a ring:
\ /\ / \ / \ / \
/
... C - A-B - C - A
Hi all,
I have a couple of question regarding the nsslapd-changelogmaxage attribute:
This attribute sets the maximum age that entries are kept in the changelog.
Documentation says that a change of the value requires a server restart.
1. Do I have to restart the server, when I enable
ok, I will.
Do I have to worry about it, though? It looks like replication is working, but
I want to make sure
-Reinhard
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 10:39 AM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: General discussion
, October 12, 2011 4:29 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; Marc Sauton
Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue
On 10/12/2011 02:16 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Good.
what about the different generation ID message? Is it possible
: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:00 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert; Marc Sauton
Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue
On 10/11/2011 02:41 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
How do I do this manually on server A?
The other question is, what kind
: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:11 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; Marc Sauton
Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue
On 10/12/2011 02:08 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Rich,
I was thinking about the Replica has a different generation ID than
Hi,
I encountered the following logs in the errors:
[06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program -
agmt=cn=srvAtosrvB (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a000c not found, we aren't
as up to date, or we purged
[06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +] NSMMReplicationPlugin -
[mailto:msau...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue
On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I encountered the following logs in the errors:
[06
Hi,
I was wondering if the following was observed somewhere else.
I am upgrading 1.1.2 to 1.2.8.3 and I see the following message, when the
upgrade of the dn is done:
[27/Sep/2011:07:57:22 +] - upgradedn NetscapeRoot: Index buffering is
disabled./lib/dirsrv/slapd-ds/upgradednformat: line
...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 2:54 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication questions.
On 09/19/2011 12:46 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi, I have a multi-master setup with three masters. All of them
Do a ldapsearch -b
'nsuniqueid=---,dc=mydomain,dc=com' -D
directory manager -w password -s base objectclass=nstombstone
This gives you all the configured (history) of replication ids. The following
is the output in my setup.
dn:
version (rpm -q db4)?
Could you run /usr/lib[64]/dirsrv/slapd-ID/dbverify? Does it complain
anything? Especially, the ancestorid index? If it does, you may want to
re-create the corrupted index...
--noriko
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Noriko,
I observed one more item, which does not bother me
Hosoi
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 4:02 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] db import failure, when setting replication up
Hi Reinhard,
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi Noriko,
I have to correct myself. The box which had the import issue
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 3:21 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] db import failure, when setting replication up
1.2.8.2
-Reinhard
Hi,
I have seen the following:
I set 2 systems up in MMR. Replication worked. For some reason, I needed to
take one of the boxes out of the replication and disabled replication. Later
on, I enabled it again and created the shadowing agreement to the other box.
Now, I saw the following errors
.
Thanks,
--noriko
On 05/17/2011 11:03 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I have seen the following:
I set 2 systems up in MMR. Replication worked. For some reason, I needed to
take one of the boxes out of the replication and disabled replication. Later
on, I enabled it again and created
Hi,
is there somewhere a flag not to switch the entry format?
I don't have an issue with a fresh install (just add
nsslapd-subtree-rename-switch: off to template-dse.ldif). But I run into
issues, when I upgrade existing Fedora DS 1.1.2 to 389 DS 1.2.8.2.
I run setup-ds.pl -u .
Thanks,
Thanks.
this works ..
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:22 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] Upgrade to 1.2.8.2
On 05/11/2011 10
discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] MMR issue, when deleting the replica setup.
On 05/09/2011 02:06 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I noticed an issue with 389 DS 1.2.7.5, which I have not seen before. Here is
what I do:
1. I create
Hi,
I noticed an issue with 389 DS 1.2.7.5, which I have not seen before. Here is
what I do:
1. I create a two multi-master setup.
2. I don't perform any changes on the directory.
3. I delete the replica setup on both systems -- everything is fine.
4. I create a two multi-master setup.
5.
...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 6:28 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] Referral errors
On 05/04/2011 03:59 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
I actually tried even a bit more 1+2+4+65536=65543.
I tried
If I find out, I let you know.
-Original Message-
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 10:36 AM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Referral errors
On 05/05
No replies so far. Does this mean nobody has seen this issue before?
-Reinhard
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 9:44 AM
To: 389-users
,
-Reinhard
-Original Message-
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 5:32 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users
Hi,
I have the following setup:
I have a 2 multimaster replication setup, where both masters also have a number
of shadowing agreements to other consumers. The data gets replicated to all
boxes and there are no issues. When I try to perform an update on the slaves,
it works on all, but one.
Hi,
I want to upgrade from 1.1.2 to 1.2.7.5, but I am not interested in using the
subtree-rename feature. Question: can I call sbin/setup-ds.pl -u with a
parameter indicating that I do not want to have this feature.
Thanks,
-Reinhard
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
:
On 02/10/2011 09:32 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I noticed that the search performance increased quite a bit with 1.2.6/1.2.7.5,
compared to 1.1.2.
I did a rather simple test, where I randomly searched objects from a small
database with about 25.000 objects. I assume that those objects
I haven't seen any responses so far. Any idea?
Thanks,
-Reinhard
From: Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 9:40 AM
To: '389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org'
Subject: Export/import with 389 DS 1.2.7.5
Hi,
I have a working MM setup and I exported my
...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Noriko Hosoi
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 12:32 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Export/import with 389 DS 1.2.7.5
Rich Megginson wrote:
On 02/08/2011 10:26 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
I haven't seen any
.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Export/import with 389 DS 1.2.7.5
On 02/08/2011 09:36 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
I did use the perl scripts (because, I want to import and export as non-root
users). I did not restart the server before I tried to import. This should be
ok, right?
Yes, it has to work
Rich,
This is not too important for me and I would not spend any time on it. I know
now what is going on and I can work around.
Thanks,
-Reinhard
-Original Message-
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 6:29 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: 389
Hi,
I have a working MM setup and I exported my db with db2ldif.pl with the -r
option:
db2ldif.pl -D 'cn=Directory Manager' -w password -n userRoot -r -a
/tmp/db_replica.ldif
The errors file do not indicate an issue:
[01/Feb/2011:09:23:59 -0500] - Beginning export of 'userRoot'
Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 1:32 PM
To: Rich Megginson
Cc: 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication with 1.2.7.5
Yes, I did report a bug regarding the deletion of the replica configuration,
but my testing are not related to this. I want to re
of going with 1.2.6?
-Reinhard
-Original Message-
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 4:00 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5
On 01/07/2011 01:52 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote
, January 10, 2011 1:10 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5
On 01/10/2011 08:18 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Rich,
I had log level set to 8192 and still there was nothing in errors.
I've tried to reproduce the problem with the latest epel
for that. I still
need to get to the bottom of this one..
-Reinhard
-Original Message-
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 1:26 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5
On 01/10
Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 3:15 PM
To: 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org; Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5
Hi all,
I compiled, built and installed the 389 DS 1.2.7.5 release.
I tried to configure a mm scenario (by using my
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 5:11 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] slapd not responding
ok. I need to do a bit more testing, but disabling access logging
Hi,
I have a 389 DS 1.1.2 server in Multi-Master mode. It happens that the server
stops responding in some circumstances. When the server was in that state, I
did a kill -11 on the pid in order to generate a coredump.
I got the following out of the core, by using gdb.
Any idea, what is going
-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: [389-users] slapd not responding
On 11/22/2010 09:38 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I have a 389 DS 1.1.2 server in Multi-Master mode. It happens that the server
stops responding in some circumstances. When the server was in that state, I
did a kill -11
-users] slapd not responding
On 11/22/2010 09:38 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I have a 389 DS 1.1.2 server in Multi-Master mode. It happens that the server
stops responding in some circumstances. When the server was in that state, I
did a kill -11 on the pid in order to generate a coredump.
I
, 2010 5:08 PM
To: 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: [389-users] slapd not responding
On 11/22/2010 03:00 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Should I open a bug for it?
Sure, but unless you can reproduce it with the latest code (1.2.6 or 1.2.7),
it's going to be very difficult for us to fix
Rich, you mentioned in one of your answers regarding the limit of Masters in a
replicated environment , quote
There really isn't a limit. The limit was only for the old Red Hat Directory
Server, and only so far as customer support goes. The only real hard limit is
65534 masters.
I was
.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master Replication
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Rich, you mentioned in one of your answers regarding the limit of
Masters in a replicated environment , quote
There really isn't a limit. The limit was only for the old Red Hat
Directory Server, and only so far as customer
-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 12:41 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I have seen the following message in the errors log
but worth checking.
Regards
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] on behalf of Reinhard Nappert
[rnapp...@juniper.net]
Sent: 28 September 2010 16:24
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory
Hi,
I built and installed the 389 Directory Server 1.2.6 on CentOS 4.4. The server
works fine.
Then, I generated the certs (using certutil) and imported them in the
cert-store. The certs are generated basically generated by the setupssl2.sh
script. When I list the certs afterwards, everything
: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 11:05 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] 389 DS 1.2.6. and certificates
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I built and installed the 389 Directory Server 1.2.6 on CentOS 4.4.
Do you mean 5.5? Or did you build
...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 5:41 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Actually I tried this.
First, I just
the replica configuration object is deleted.
-Reinhard
-Original Message-
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:56 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory
...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 5:57 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Rich,
I have an setup like
...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 10:09 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
At first I create (besides
server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
To explain it a bit easier, I define two methods:
1. createAgreement(remote ldap): -- creates locally replication
agreement for remote ldap
nsDS5ReplicaType=3
nsDS5Flags=1
nsDS5ReplicaId
...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 10:37 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
To explain it a bit easier, I define two methods:
1. createAgreement
...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 12:32 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
So,
Is there a way to find out if a server was used
Hi,
I have seen the following message in the errors log file, when I set MMR
agreements up:
[10/Aug/2010:11:46:44 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - repl_set_mtn_referrals:
could not set referrals for replica o=base: 1
[10/Aug/2010:11:46:44 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin -
:12:38 -0400] - BAD CACHE ASSERTION at
../ldap/servers/slapd/back-ldbm/cache.c/765: e-ep_refcnt 0
Hope, this helps.
Thanks,
-Reinhard
-Original Message-
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 4:49 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: [389-users] Referral not working
Hi,
I configured a master slave setup where the userRoot db has an referral to the
master configured. See dse.lif entry:
dn: cn=o=BASE,cn=mapping tree,cn=config
objectClass: top
objectClass: extensibleObject
objectClass: nsMappingTree
cn: o=BASE
nsslapd-state: referral on update
Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Rich,
Let's see if this give you a hint. Hopefully, it does
Looks really strange, as if the stack trace is corrupted e.g.
#7 0x2b5577b32fbb in plugin_call_plugins (pb=0xa8ad30, whichfunction
: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:59 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Where do
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nappert
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 10:08 AM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Setting it to 5000 seconds makes me to get past those 257 searches
] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 6:04 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi Rick,
I attached access and error file with debug level 8. The server does not
respond
-
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 6:04 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Reinhard Nappert wrote
for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi all,
I have seen a weird behavior of my DS (1.1.2). It has a very small
database (only about 2300 objects). A client performed a one-level
search retrieving the children. The server find
From: 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson
[rmegg...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 2:20 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Subject: Re: [389-users] Skipped request ...
Reinhard
Hi all,
I have seen a weird behavior of my DS (1.1.2). It has a very small database
(only about 2300 objects). A client performed a one-level search retrieving the
children. The server find 114 objects, but the search was very slow:
[06/May/2010:12:23:11 +] conn=127 op=149 SRCH base=base
72 matches
Mail list logo
