[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: "olcSizeLimit: size.prtotal=disabled" ignored?
Thank you. Will try to understand the man page. Appreciate your help.
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Dieter Klünter <dieter@dkluenter.de> wrote:
> Am Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:59:28 +0300
> schrieb Igor Shmukler <igor.shmukler@gmail.com>:
>
>> $ slapd -V
>> @(#) $OpenLDAP: slapd (Ubuntu) (Mar 17 2014 21:20:08) $
>>
>> I tried olcSizeLimit, before adding olcSizeLimits. Perhaps there is a
>> bug.
>
> Ther is no bug. Read the manual page slapd-config(5) on olclimits,
> base DN and DN type, pay attention to dn type 'this'.
>
> -Dieter
>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Dieter Klünter <dieter@dkluenter.de>
>> wrote:
>> > Am Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:27:39 +0300
>> > schrieb Igor Shmukler <igor.shmukler@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> Hi DIeter,
>> >>
>> >> Thank you again. I changed the config. Now, slapcat shows:
>> >> olcSizeLimit: size.prtotal=disabled
>> >> olcLimits: {0}dn=* size.soft=1000 size.hard=1000
>> >> size.prtotal=disabled
>> >
>> > you should either user sizelimit or limit in order to disable
>> > pagedResults, but not both.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Still the same story:
>> >> # filter: (objectclass=*)
>> >> # requesting: ALL
>> >> # with pagedResults critical control: size=5
>> >> #
>> >>
>> >> # sssvlv.com
>> >> dn: dc=sssvlv,dc=com
>> >> objectClass: top
>> >>
>> >> Does it mean there is a bug?
>> >
>> > There is no bug, at least not since release 2.4.33. I tested it with
>> > 2.4.33, 2.4.36, 2.4.42. Mostlikly your configuration is missing some
>> > vital parameters.
>> >
>> > -Dieter
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Dieter Klünter
>> >> <dieter@dkluenter.de> wrote:
>> >> > Am Wed, 2 Sep 2015 12:50:59 +0300
>> >> > schrieb Igor Shmukler <igor.shmukler@gmail.com>:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hello DIeter,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thank you for the clarification.
>> >> >> I modified the LDIF to apply the page size limit to a specific
>> >> >> database. Now, slapcat(8) shows limits for my DIT database:
>> >> >> olcSizeLimit: size.prtotal=disabled
>> >> >> olcLimits: {0}dn=* size.soft=unlimited size.hard=unlimited
>> >> >
>> >> > size.hard=unlimited is you problem.
>> >> > From slapd.conf(5)
>> >> >
>> >> > If pagedResults control is requested, the hard size limit is
>> >> > used by default,
>> >> > Use unlimited to allow unlimited number of entries to be
>> >> > returned, e.g. to allow the use of the pagedResults control as a
>> >> > means to circumvent size limitations on regular searches;
>> >> >
>> >> > -Dieter
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The only difference from an example that I found - in my
>> >> >> configuration olcSizeLimit comes before olcLimits. Hopefully,
>> >> >> this is not the problem.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The server however still does process paged results as below:
>> >> >> # extended LDIF
>> >> >> #
>> >> >> # LDAPv3
>> >> >> # base <dc=sssvlv,dc=com> with scope subtree
>> >> >> # filter: (objectclass=*)
>> >> >> # requesting: ALL
>> >> >> # with pagedResults critical control: size=5
>> >> >> #
>> >> >>
>> >> >> # sssvlv.com
>> >> >> dn: dc=sssvlv,dc=com
>> >> >> objectClass: top
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is there a requirement to apply olcLimits before olcSizeLImit?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sincerely,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Igor Shmukler
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Dieter Klünter
>> >> >> <dieter@dkluenter.de> wrote:
>> >> >> > Am Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:38:42 +0300
>> >> >> > schrieb Igor Shmukler <igor.shmukler@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Hello Dieter,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Thank you for replying.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > slapd silently ignores the control request, but sizelimit
>> >> >> >> > still comes into effect.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Given that, as well as the other relevant information...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Is "olcSizieLimit: size.prtotal=disabled" not affecting the
>> >> >> >> response, a bug in OpenLDAP 2.4.x, or did I incorrectly
>> >> >> >> understand the documentation? If it is a bug, should it be
>> >> >> >> filed? How would one go about disabling simple paged results
>> >> >> >> [having the OpenLDAP server respond with critical extension
>> >> >> >> unavailable or similar]? Is restricting access to the control
>> >> >> >> with an ACL is the way to go?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I have overlooked a few mistakes of yours :-(
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 1. you modified the global configuration part, that is
>> >> >> > cn=config, and not a database part.
>> >> >> > 2. you configured a sizelimit, not a limit.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > slapd.conf(5) clearly states:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > GENERAL DATABASE OPTIONS
>> >> >> > Options in this section only apply to the configuration file
>> >> >> > section for the database in which they are defined.
>> >> >> > 'limits' is specified within the general database options,
>> >> >> > size.prtotal is defined within the 'limits' section.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > -Dieter
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Dieter Klünter | Systemberatung
>> >> >> > http://sys4.de
>> >> >> > GPG Key ID: E9ED159B
>> >> >> > 53°37'09,95"N
>> >> >> > 10°08'02,42"E
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Dieter Klünter | Systemberatung
>> >> > http://sys4.de
>> >> > GPG Key ID: E9ED159B
>> >> > 53°37'09,95"N
>> >> > 10°08'02,42"E
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Dieter Klünter | Systemberatung
>> > http://sys4.de
>> > GPG Key ID: E9ED159B
>> > 53°37'09,95"N
>> > 10°08'02,42"E
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dieter Klünter | Systemberatung
> http://sys4.de
> GPG Key ID: E9ED159B
> 53°37'09,95"N
> 10°08'02,42"E
>