Re: "descriptor table size" errors?

[Tony Earnshaw <tonni@hetnet.nl>]

Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade skrev, on 13-07-2007 22:24:

> We seem to be getting errors every night a couple minutes after 
> logrotate rotates our logs and sends a SIGHUP to syslog-ng (to force a 
> reload):
>
> Jul 11 04:02:46 csenet slapd[8823]: daemon: 1024 beyond descriptor table 
> size 1024
>
> Nothing is touching our slapd process (i.e., same process over several 
> days.)
>
> This seems only to happen on our master LDAP server.  We're using slurpd 
> for replication to our two slave servers.
>
> This morning, something apparently corrupted our directory, which 
> apparently got replicated to our slaves; we restored the db from the 
> nightly dump (made from slapcat on another replica) and LDAP seems happy 
> again.
>
> We can't see anything in the logs that would lend a clue as to what 
> might be going on.  Any suggestions as to where I should start looking?
>
> We're running RHEL 4 with all updates applied, using RH's openldap 
> packages (2.2.13).
>
> Looking back in the logs, it seems that the syslog message above occurs 
> for a couple minutes after syslog-ng is restarted, and then stops 
> occurring until the next time syslog-ng is restarted, but it's 
> apparently been happening for quite a while.  Today is the first time 
> we've had corruption (or otherwise total failure) of the LDAP directory, 
> though.
>
> Any suggestions or help will be greatly appreciated.

We run RHAS4, with a new (IBM iron Opteron) RHL5 Server machine soon to 
be deployed. I also run a home Fedora FC6 rig with the same setups and 
API software specs.

All work fine, no problems.

We run syslog-ng 1.6.8. We run Buchan Milne's OpenLDAP 2.3 version 
2.3.36, using his built-in BDB 4.2.52 support on RHL5 and FC6, with my 
own BDB 4.2.52 libraries on RHAS4. Everything works fine on all machines.

Kudos to Buchan:

2 surmises:

1: RHL5 and FC6 both have BDB 4.3 as standard; Buchan's srpm (and, 
believe me, I refuse to install *ANY* software without it being 
available as an rpm. If it's not, I bake my own - but Buchan's srpm is 
far superior to anything I could bake myself) is "intelligent" enough to 
see that Red Hat has given me an unstable version of BDB and substitute 
a stable version - 5-patched 4.2.52 for his OpenLDAP alone - all the 
other RH stuff continues to use 4.3;

2: I'm a die-hard Red Hat/CentOS person, but although those give me 
unparalleled stability and mostly update without preference, OpenLDAP is 
a great exception. I would not touch RHAS4/CentOS 5's OpenLDAP with a 
barge pole. Fedora FC6/7 is a possible exception because it's largely up 
to date, but since Buchan's stuff gives me so much modular 
configurability, I'll stick with him for FC as well.

Best,

--Tonni



--
Tony Earnshaw
Email: tonni at hetnet dot nl