[389-users] Re: Rhel 9.4 389-DS 2.4.5 Provider fails to fully initialize Rhel 9.4 389-DS 2.4.5 Consumer database.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



there is no apparent code changes between 389-ds-base-2.4.5-9 and 389-ds-base-2.4.5 that relate to the supplier's messages from ldap/servers/plugins/replication/repl5_connection.c  :
 
[13/Nov/2024:15:54:37.513840430 -0600] - ERR - NSMMReplicationPlugin - perform_operation - agmt="cn=ldap-repb-test-ra" (ldap-repb-test:636): Failed to send extended operation: LDAP error 51 (Server is busy)
[13/Nov/2024:15:54:37.515818173 -0600] - DEBUG - NSMMReplicationPlugin - check_flow_control_tot_init - agmt="cn=ldap-repb-test-ra" (ldap-repb-test:636) - Invalid message ids [ msgid sent: -1, rcv: 5]

is it always failing in the same exact way?

are there any error messages in the form of
ERR - setup_ol_tls_conn - failed: unable to create new TLS context
?

how many CPU cores are available on the supplier?
is there 1 NUMA node configured for the LDAP service?

verify what is the nsslapd-ioblocktimeout value, default 10000mS / 10sec , may be too long
dsconf INSTANCE  config get nsslapd-ioblocktimeout
2.1.105. nsslapd-ioblocktimeout
https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_directory_server/12/html/configuration_and_schema_reference/assembly_core-server-configuration-attributes_config-schema-reference-title#ref_nsslapd-ioblocktimeout_assembly_cn-config

verify what is the nsslapd-idletimeout value, default 3600 sec, may be too long
2.1.102. nsslapd-idletimeout
https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_directory_server/12/html/configuration_and_schema_reference/assembly_core-server-configuration-attributes_config-schema-reference-title#ref_nsslapd-idletimeout_assembly_cn-config

->
dsconf INSTANCE config get | grep timeout
dsconf INSTANCE config replace nsslapd-idletimeout=xx
dsconf INSTANCE config replace nsslapd-ioblocktimeout=xx


may be try to change the nsds5ReplicaReleaseTimeout value from default 60sec to 45sec ( not under 30 seconds), for the duration of the LDAP init:
2.7.20. nsDS5ReplicaReleaseTimeout 
https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_directory_server/12/html/configuration_and_schema_reference/assembly_core-server-configuration-attributes_config-schema-reference-title#ref_nsDS5ReplicaReleaseTimeout_assembly_cn-replica-cn-suffix_dn-cn-mapping-tree-cn-config

or the parameter nsDS5ReplicaTimeout to a shorter value than the default of 120 sec, for the duration of the LDAP init:
2.8.32. nsDS5ReplicaTimeout
https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_directory_server/12/html/configuration_and_schema_reference/assembly_core-server-configuration-attributes_config-schema-reference-title#ref_nsDS5ReplicaTimeout_assembly_cn-replicationagreementname-cn-replica-cn-suffix_dn-cn-mapping-tree-cn-config

->
ldapsearch -o ldif-wrap=no -LLLxD "cn=directory manager" -W -b "cn=mapping tree,cn=config" nsDS5ReplicaTimeout nsds5ReplicaProtocolTimeout nsDS5ReplicaReleaseTimeout

(
dsconf INSTANCE replication set --help
...
  --repl-release-timeout REPL_RELEASE_TIMEOUT
                        A timeout in seconds a replication supplier should
                        send updates before it yields its replication session

dsconf INSTANCE replication set --suffix SUFFIX ...
)


eventually try using LMDB instead of BDB?

was there any dsconf backup and restore previously done?

note: there is no 389-ds 2.4.5-1 build on RHDS-11.x on RHEL-8.x or RHEL-8.x IdM, the 2.4.5.x builds are for RHDS-12.4 on RHEL-9.4 or RHEL-9.4 IdM, the 389-ds-base version 1.4.3.39-* was for RHDS-11.9 on RHEL-8.10 and RHEL-8.10 IdM, may be a typo in this comment?
"
A Rhel 8.10 provider 389-ds 2.4.5-1 can load our whole data base w/o error on the same consumer Rhel 9.4 389-DS 2.4.5-9 on port 636 LDAPS. I tried rhel 9.4 389-ds 2.4.5-1 (same version that worked on Rhel 8.10)  
"

concern about the 389-ds-base versions mentioned: the interesting described scenario appears to be with 2.4.5-9 and 2.4.5-1 on RHEL-9.4, but the versions 389-ds-base-2.4.5-1 and 2.4.5-9 were for RHEL-9.4 IdM, not for a standalone LDAP server ( supported scenario are RHEL IdM or RHDS )

Cordially,
Marc S.

On Sat, Dec 28, 2024 at 11:21 PM Timothy Bouvet via 389-users <389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is anyone seeing this 389-DS question?
--
_______________________________________________
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-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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora User Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Linux Apps]     [Maemo Users]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux