Justin Crawford wrote: > I think the replication error may be a response to the crash, and not > necessarily a clue to the the cause. > > One of the slapd processes just crashed again, and the logs on the > second server show only the same replication error. I take it to mean > the replication can't continue, because the slapd process on the other > server has crashed. > > Anyway, today is the first time in 5 months that either of these > servers has had any issue whatsoever. Something must have changed. Even something that may appear at first glance to be innocuous. Are you using VLV (browsing index in the console)? > Are there other documented instances of the fedora server crashing > hard without generating errors? > We're running 1.0.2. > > $ uname -r -v -p -i -o > 2.6.9-34.0.2.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Jun 30 10:32:04 EDT 2006 x86_64 x86_64 > GNU/Linux > > Thanks! > Justin > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* fedora-directory-users-bounces at redhat.com > [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces at redhat.com] *On Behalf Of > *Eddie C > *Sent:* Monday, March 05, 2007 12:00 PM > *To:* General discussion list for the Fedora Directory server project. > *Subject:* Re: slapd crash on replicate > attempt > > Make sure that when you created an account for replication that > the acount did not expire and lock out. > > On 3/5/07, *Justin Crawford* < Justin.Crawford at cusys.edu > <mailto:Justin.Crawford at cusys.edu>> wrote: > > Hi- > > This morning a multi-master pair that has been running since > Nov. 5 > crashed. There is only one clue, in the error log of one of the > directories: > > NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=auth_ldap2 to auth_ldap1" > (ldap:389): > Unable to receive the response for a startReplication extended > operation > to consumer (Can't contact LDAP server). Will retry later. > > That appears to be the last thing either process said before > they both > gave up, almost simultaneously. > > Can anyone help me understand what happened? > > It looks like the replication agreements survived; at least, > in the > replication configuration section of each directory's console, > there is > a message with a current time saying "Incremental update > succeeded." > > Thanks! > > Justin > > -- > Fedora-directory-users mailing list > Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > <mailto:Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > Fedora-directory-users mailing list > Fedora-directory-users at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3245 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/389-users/attachments/20070306/669dbc28/attachment.bin
