On 08/12/2011 01:05 AM, Penedo wrote:
On 11 August 2011 23:57, Rich Megginson
<rmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 08/10/2011 11:00 PM, Amos Shapira
wrote:
Some more research after I sent my
question (narrower search terms) found the following
bug and fix:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624442
The package I use is
centos-ds-base-8.1.0-0.14.el5.centos.2
Does this mean that this is a bug in the package I
have and I should just use different replication
id's?
Or can I still somehow clear the tombstones?
You might be able to use db2ldif -r to dump the database
along with the replication meta data, then edit the LDIF
file to remove the bogus data, then ldif2db to reload your
database from the LDIF file.
Thanks. This sounds like what I was after.
For now I just assigned new replica numbers to each server
and it seems to work.
Is there any reason to risk the data in order to drop the
old replica ID's or is it OK to ignore them and just leave
them there?
It shouldn't cause any data loss. You might find annoying messages
in the errors log though.
|
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
