Hi,
Some other possibilities to complete Mark's answer:
replication misconfiguration on the consumer (replication role configured as hub or as supplier instead of consumer)
if it is about the changelog db (i.e the retro changelog databases) and in this case it is the retro changelog trimming configuration that are missing.
FYI: there is a known issue about replication_changelog.db is getting wrongly created on consumer but the db file should not grow but stay nearly empty
Regards
Pierre
Some other possibilities to complete Mark's answer:
replication misconfiguration on the consumer (replication role configured as hub or as supplier instead of consumer)
if it is about the changelog db (i.e the retro changelog databases) and in this case it is the retro changelog trimming configuration that are missing.
FYI: there is a known issue about replication_changelog.db is getting wrongly created on consumer but the db file should not grow but stay nearly empty
Regards
Pierre
On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 7:32 PM Mark Reynolds <mareynol@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Changed the subject of this email as this message was filtered into my
junk folder...
On 7/15/24 1:05 PM, kamakshya nayak wrote:
> I have a cascading multi setup 389-ds.
> I observed that on my supplier, hub and consumer are doing good in
> terms of replication.
> They are healthy.
> What I observe is supplier and hub is doing good with replication and
> size of changelog.db for one of the backend suffix is less.
> But, consumer changelog.db disk space utilization is more around 34 Gb
> and supplier and hub changelog.db disk space utilization is 40 mb.
> What could be the issue and why it's utilizing that high disk space
> for changelog.db ?
What version of 389-ds-base are you using?
At first glance it would appear you have changelog trimming configured
on the supplier/hub but not on the consumer. That could be the issue,
or it could be changelog compaction. On the other hand a consumer does
not need a changelog so you could remove it's configuration.
Also I don't see a "changelog.db" file in my setup, so maybe you are on
a very old version?
Mark
>
> And, why a consumer is holding changelog.db file.. where could be the
> issue.
>
> Thank you.
>
--
Identity Management Development Team
--
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
389 Directory Server Development Team
389 Directory Server Development Team
-- _______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
