Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PR - Ticket - 49623-cont cenotaph errors on modrdn operations #3944

Closed
389-ds-bot opened this issue Sep 13, 2020 · 7 comments
Closed

PR - Ticket - 49623-cont cenotaph errors on modrdn operations #3944

389-ds-bot opened this issue Sep 13, 2020 · 7 comments
Labels
merged Migration flag - PR pr Migration flag - PR

Comments

@389-ds-bot
Copy link

Cloned from Pagure Pull-Request: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50891

  • Created at 2020-02-11 10:09:24 by lkrispen (@elkris)
  • Merged at 2020-02-11 17:48:48

Bug: In modrdn operations a cenotaph entries are created to track the time when
an entry had existed. But in cases where rentries were renamed in cycles
reusing the dns again and again this failed with an error: "faild to add cenotaph"

Fix: Previous versions of cenotaphs with the same dn are not used (or maybe in very unlikely
scenarios) so there is no need to change the dn construction to be able to keep all
versions of the same cenotaph. Instead, if the creation of the cenotaph fails because
it already exists, the existin cenotaph is moodified with the lifespan data of the
cenotaph that was tried to add.

Reviewed by: ?

@389-ds-bot 389-ds-bot added merged Migration flag - PR pr Migration flag - PR labels Sep 13, 2020
@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from tbordaz (@tbordaz) at 2020-02-11 15:26:15

In case of failure to ADD, the entry cenotaph is not consumed. Should not it be freed ?

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from tbordaz (@tbordaz) at 2020-02-11 15:45:35

Except that the patch looks good to me

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from lkrispen (@elkris) at 2020-02-11 16:00:35

In case of failure to ADD, the entry cenotaph is not consumed. Should not it be freed ?

it is always consumed, see end of op_shared_add and comment before slapi_add_entry_internal()

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from tbordaz (@tbordaz) at 2020-02-11 17:36:49

You are right, it is freed systematically in op_shared_add. ACK

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from lkrispen (@elkris) at 2020-02-11 17:48:19

rebased onto 02d23f0

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from lkrispen (@elkris) at 2020-02-11 17:48:49

Pull-Request has been merged by elkris

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Patch
50891.patch

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged Migration flag - PR pr Migration flag - PR
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant