On 03/01/2012 08:57 PM, Michael R. Gettes wrote:
dn: cn=changenumber,cn=index,cn=changelog,cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=confi
g
objectClass: top
objectClass: nsIndex
cn: changenumber
nsSystemIndex: false
nsIndexType: eq
nsMatchingRule: integerOrderingMatch
creatorsName: cn=Retro Changelog Plugin,cn=plugins,cn=config
modifiersName: cn=Retro Changelog Plugin,cn=plugins,cn=config
createTimestamp: 20111215194522Z
modifyTimestamp: 20111215194522Z
dn: cn=entryusn,cn=index,cn=changelog,cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
objectClass: top
objectClass: nsIndex
cn: entryusn
nsSystemIndex: true
nsIndexType: eq
nsMatchingRule: integerOrderingMatch
creatorsName: cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
modifiersName: cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
createTimestamp: 20111215194522Z
modifyTimestamp: 20111215194522Z
dn: cn=entryusn,cn=default indexes,cn=config,cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=co
nfig
objectClass: top
objectClass: nsIndex
cn: entryusn
nsSystemIndex: true
nsIndexType: eq
nsMatchingRule: integerOrderingMatch
dn: cn=entryusn,cn=index,cn=NetscapeRoot,cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
objectClass: top
objectClass: nsIndex
cn: entryusn
nsSystemIndex: true
nsIndexType: eq
nsMatchingRule: integerOrderingMatch
creatorsName: cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
modifiersName: cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
createTimestamp: 20110817222255Z
modifyTimestamp: 20110817222255Z
dn: cn=entryusn,cn=index,cn=userRoot,cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
objectClass: top
objectClass: nsIndex
cn: entryusn
nsSystemIndex: true
nsIndexType: eq
nsMatchingRule: integerOrderingMatch
creatorsName: cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
modifiersName: cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config
createTimestamp: 20110722160718Z
modifyTimestamp: 20110722160718Z
This code has changed with 389-ds-base 1.2.10.2 - any chance you could
try that version, in epel-testing?
On Mar 1, 2012, at 22:26, Rich Megginson wrote:
On 03/01/2012 08:10 PM, Michael R. Gettes wrote:
As I have tried to learn more about this problem, it would appear there isn't an obvious way to address this from the various config files. This leaves me at a bit of a loss to determine whether or not I should proceed with this version of the software. I get this integerOrderingMatch error for each of 3 the databases I have… netscaperoot, userRoot and changelog. I do have intention of pointing provisioning software at the directory so search filters of (x<=nnn) will happen. I issued some of these searches by hand and they still execute quickly.
Should I worry about these errors or just ignore them?
Can you provide your index entries that use integerOrderingMatch?
Advice appreciated.
/mrg
On Mar 1, 2012, at 9:02, Michael R. Gettes wrote:
Hi,
I am upgrading from 1.2.9.9 from 1.2.8.3 and I am getting the following error from setup-ds-admin.pl --update
[01/Mar/2012:08:52:51 -0500] - from ldbm instance init: line 0: unknown or invalid matching rule "integerOrderingMatch" in index configuration (ignored)
[01/Mar/2012:08:52:51 -0500] - from DSE add: line 0: unknown or invalid matching rule "integerOrderingMatch" in index configuration (ignored)
There are several objects in dse.ldif with the above matching rule defined. I'm not sure what to do with this. Either find all instances of the matching rule reference and remove them or put back the matching rule (if i can locate it from another one of my servers).
Also, I get the following and I believe these are non-issues - we don't utilize selinux. Is there some way to disable the selinux config in setup-ds-admin.pl??? I have looked through the source code and don't see how to disable it.
libsepol.print_missing_requirements: piranha's global requirements were not met: type/attribute piranha_port_t
libsemanage.semanage_link_sandbox: Link packages failed
/usr/sbin/semanage: Could not add port tcp/9830
I am on RHEL5.7 (if that makes a difference).
Many thanks for Rich's help in the past. I am grateful for this mailing list and all the other resources on the net to help me with the few problems I have had bringing up 389 for my institution.
/mrg
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
