Issue 6265 - lmdb - missing entries in range searches #6266
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
vashirov
reviewed
Jul 23, 2024
|
Fixed the two issues that @vashirov has found. |
droideck
requested changes
Jul 24, 2024
|
Fixed @droideck review comments |
progier389
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2024
* Issue 6265 - lmdb - missing entries in range searches Several issues seen after generating ldif with 2000 users and importing it in a replica: 1. The entryid attribute in missing in the suffix entry. 2. Access log shows that the internal search looking for "(parentid>=1)" is not returning all entries but one. 3. When initializing a replica through a replication agreement some entries are missing (because of 2) 4. Once 2. get fixed, the bulk import still fails because the default values for nsds5ReplicaFlowControlWindow and nsds5ReplicaFlowControlPause are not adapted to lmdb (supplier sent the entry faster than bdb and the target replica import them slower. The fix is about: 1. Ensuring that the operational attribute are properly set when importing the suffix entry. 2. and 3. Avoid using database bulk operation when computing range unless we are sure that bdb is used. (rely instead on the generic dblayer database iterator - dblayer_cursor_iterate. 4. Change the default values for nsds5ReplicaFlowControlWindow and nsds5ReplicaFlowControlPause if agreement is on a lmdb backend. Issue: #6265 Reviewed by: @vashirov, @droideck (Thanks!) (cherry picked from commit f75b5e2)
progier389
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 25, 2024
* Issue 6265 - lmdb - missing entries in range searches Several issues seen after generating ldif with 2000 users and importing it in a replica: 1. The entryid attribute in missing in the suffix entry. 2. Access log shows that the internal search looking for "(parentid>=1)" is not returning all entries but one. 3. When initializing a replica through a replication agreement some entries are missing (because of 2) 4. Once 2. get fixed, the bulk import still fails because the default values for nsds5ReplicaFlowControlWindow and nsds5ReplicaFlowControlPause are not adapted to lmdb (supplier sent the entry faster than bdb and the target replica import them slower. The fix is about: 1. Ensuring that the operational attribute are properly set when importing the suffix entry. 2. and 3. Avoid using database bulk operation when computing range unless we are sure that bdb is used. (rely instead on the generic dblayer database iterator - dblayer_cursor_iterate. 4. Change the default values for nsds5ReplicaFlowControlWindow and nsds5ReplicaFlowControlPause if agreement is on a lmdb backend. Issue: #6265 Reviewed by: @vashirov, @droideck (Thanks!) (cherry picked from commit f75b5e2)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Several issue seen after generating ldif with 2000 users and importing it in a replica:
The fix is about
Issue: #6265
Reviewed by: @vashirov, @droideck (Thanks!)