Re: (ITS#3421) Replication problem with slurpd

[ando@sys-net.it]

raphael.ouazana@linagora.com wrote:

>Full_Name: Raphael Ouazana
>Version: 2.2.11
>OS: Linux
>URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
>Submission from: (NULL) (194.98.7.155)
>
>
>
>I have a problem with slurpd. I have one master which replicates on 2 slaves
>which one replicates on one other slave.
>M -> S1
>  -> S/M -> S2
>
>Each night I delete all the entries of the 4 directories and re-populate the
>master (M) with ldapadd. So slurpd of the Master populates S1 and the
>Slave/Master (S/M) ; and slurpd of S/M populates S2.
>The problem is that when I check if all entries are really in the 4 directories,
>I can see that some are missing (about 0 to 4, rarely more) ! For example I can
>have :
>M : 118821 entries
>S1 : 118819
>M/S : 118819
>S2 : 118818
>
In principle, the results of ldapsearch should be comparable with diff 
to see what's missing; then you should be able to look at the logs of 
all the servers (and of the slurpds) and trace what happened to those 
entries.  If the entries don't get written/returned in the same order, 
you may need to ldapsearch with -S "" (the empty string) to sort entries 
by DN.

>Of course I have nothing in .rej files, and see nothing in slurpd logs when I
>activate them.
>
>Moreother the problem seems to be pretty hard to reproduce. I tried to reproduce
>it with test data but don't success. So I'm looking for methods to analyse the
>problem.
>
>I tested once with OpenLDAP 2.2.16 and had the same bug.
>  
>
Unless you provide indications as of to reproduce the problem, I suggest 
you investigate as above.  Also, you should specify what version causes 
the problem; note that unless it can be reproduced with the latest 
release, it is unlikely that it gets fixed or even traced to the root cause.

p.




    SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497