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 - Issue 49731 - set and use db_home_directory by default #4012

Closed
389-ds-bot opened this issue Sep 13, 2020 · 8 comments
Closed

PR - Issue 49731 - set and use db_home_directory by default #4012

389-ds-bot opened this issue Sep 13, 2020 · 8 comments
Labels
merged Migration flag - PR pr Migration flag - PR

Comments

@389-ds-bot
Copy link

389-ds-bot commented Sep 13, 2020

Cloned from Pagure Pull-Request: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50959


Description:

New instances will automatically create and use db_home_dir /dev/shm/dirsrv/slapd-INSTANCE.

relates: Resolves: #2790

@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 2020-03-16 18:16:52

Just a dummy question regarding containers. Aren't they using the same /dev/shm ?
A risk for several containers running slapd-standalone1 to step on each other ?

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2020-03-16 19:14:38

Just a dummy question regarding containers. Aren't they using the same /dev/shm ?
A risk for several containers running slapd-standalone1 to step on each other ?

That's a good question. If there are multiple instances with the same name then that would definitely be a problem. I'd hate to have to globally disable this feature if it's "containerised". Is that how customers deploy containers? One system with multiple images? I ask because maybe we could document that caveat?

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from firstyear (@Firstyear) at 2020-03-17 00:18:55

In containers they each get their own /dev/shm I think, I think they are seperated. So I think that shouldn't be arisk. Certainly we can test this and then roll back if it's a problem. :)

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2020-03-18 17:10:19

rebased onto b097eadfffda2be904ff9ca8cda1f6f38398d32c

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from tbordaz (@tbordaz) at 2020-03-25 18:11:46

The patch looks good to me. Ack

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2020-03-25 19:23:39

rebased onto 96c8abb

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2020-03-25 19:32:12

Pull-Request has been merged by mreynolds389

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Patch
50959.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