[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: Follow up to Corrupt Index files



http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-software/200210/msg00111.html

You can compile back-ldbm with -DLDBM_DEBUG_IDL to enable index validity
checks. This will slow things down quite a bit; it may be worthwhile to build
slapindex this way and leave the checks turned off when building slapd
itself. However, I don't think you should need to do this any more.

Any indexing bugs we knew about in 1999 (re: the message you referenced
below) are fixed in the current releases. The last known indexing bug in
back-ldbm was fixed in 2.0.26 (and 2.1.5; back-ldbm in 2.1 is mostly the same
as in 2.0).

Since back-bdb uses a completely different indexing scheme from back-ldbm, no
back-ldbm indexing bugs exist in back-bdb. Of course back-bdb may have bugs
of its own. But again, the last known back-bdb indexing bug was fixed in
2.1.5.

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
> [mailto:owner-openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Kevin
> McEachern
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:13 AM
> To: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
> Subject: RE: Follow up to Corrupt Index files
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin McEachern 
> Sent: October 30, 2002 11:49 AM
> To: 'Tony Earnshaw'
> Subject: RE: Follow up to Corrupt Index files
> 
> 
> Thank you for your reply, however some questions still remain 
> unanswered:
> 
> > Why in the name of all that is wonderful, if integrity 
> means so much to
> > you (which naturally it ought to), don't you run a test DSA with
> > whatever it is you want to test?
> 
> Data integrity is not the only issue at hand here. A major 
> issue is that we need to be able to DETECT data corruption 
> (which could occur at any time, in production or testing). 
> The only reason I mention this here is because in one of the 
> posts listed in my previous email, it was mentioned that 
> index corruption was the result of an application level error 
> (see: 
http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-software/199911/msg00024.html), and
not a database error. So my (restated) questions are: Is this error corrected
by using back-bdb instead of back-ldbm, and if not, are there tools
(available or in development) that could be used to detect these application
level failures.

> Oh - and do try to make backups as the BDB 4 documents
> describe? Not by doing slapcat, but by taking advantage of the
> fine-grained, roll-back logging facilities offered by the latest
> Berkeley technology.

slapcat seems more reasonable to me and (I believe) its how we're planning on
doing backups, since this eliminates dependence on a Berkeley database
backend, or even OpenLDAP as a directory server.

Thanks again,
Kevin McEachern.


<<attachment: winmail.dat>>