Re: Upgrade from OpenLDAP 2.1.30 -> 2.3.37

[Leon de Rooij <leon@scarlet-internet.nl>]

Buchan,

Thank you very much ! I don't see how I could have missed the
idlcachesize.. After setting it to 3x the cachesize (2nd and later)
searches take .005s to complete :-)

I see I have a lot of reading to do still about how to set sane defaults
for these options.

Thanks again,

Leon


On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 15:43 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> On 7/31/07, Leon de Rooij <leon@scarlet-internet.nl> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After a period of testing I upgraded our LDAP servers from 2.1.30 to
> > 2.3.37. Many things were done, changed replication from slurpd to
> > syncrepl, changed backend from ldbm to hdb, even changed the structure
> > of the tree a bit, almost everything works great :)
> >
> > Except some searches are slower !
> >
> > I have around 160K dn's with around 3.2M attrs in a server with 4G
> > memory with a tree looking like this (simplified):
> 
> 
> > I have indexed o, ou and namespace with pres and eq (and mail with pres,
> > eq and sub), so I don't see a problem there. I still have to look a bit
> > more into DB_CONFIG tuning, but still, is it normal behaviour of
> > OpenLDAP 2.3.37 with hdb backend that searches in a subtree are slower
> > than in the base of the tree ?
> 
> With a relatively large database, tuning can have quite a big impact
> on behaviour (if the directory is busy). You really need to provide
> information on what tuning you have done (both in DB_CONFIG, and with
> cachesize and idlcachesize for this database in slapd.conf). You most
> likely need at least 100MB cachesize set in DB_CONFIG ... and hdb
> likes at least 3* idlcachesize as (entry) cachesize (as discussed in
> the slapd-hdb man page).
> 
> Regards,
> Buchan