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

Re: OpenLDAP syncrepl woes





On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com> wrote:
Jeffrey Crawford wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Jeffrey Crawford<jeffreyc@ucsc.edu>  wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Howard Chu<hyc@symas.com>  wrote:
Jeffrey Crawford wrote:

I'm trying to stabilize our openldap server farm before going live and
am finding that despite the contextCSN matching between providers and
replicas, the actual content of the server is getting out of sync.
This is most prominent when we are testing our population routine and
we need to remove all accounts before starting. right now it's only
about 22000 entries (It will get much larger).

During the mass delete we got the following sprinkled throughout the
logs on all machines:
====
Nov 15 15:47:16 idm-prod-ldap-2 slapd[33070]: bdb(dc=domain,dc=name):
previous transaction deadlock return not resolved

Wow. I've never seen this error message before. What version of OpenLDAP and
BerkeleyDB are you using?

FreeBSD 8.2 with openldap 2.4.26, however like I mentioned before,
right now I think we are squeezing ram right now Part of this
deployment was to discover how much ram we needed on the virtual
machine and it was started pretty low.

Oh and we are using bdb 4.6 right now (forgot to answer that)

Running out of memory would cause an obvious error message ("no memory") so that's not likely to be the problem here. Might be worth upgrading to at least BDB 4.8, but again, never having seen BDB spit out that error before, that's just a guess.


--
 -- Howard Chu
 CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
 Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
 Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/

Not sure if this is significant but I'm been noticing that this error only shows up on deletes. However it also shows up on deletes on the machine I'm running the ldapdelete against. So perhaps this is more of a software issue. I'll go ahead and run this with more ram and I'll check with the sysadmin if they can compile it against bdb 4.8 and see if that changes anything. But I don't think ITS#7052 applies here because the machine I'm doing this against does not use syncrepl, its the provider to others.

This is a machine on a VM. Are there any known issues with that?

Jeffrey