Reinhard Nappert wrote: > Hi all, > > I have seen a weird behavior of my DS (1.1.2). It has a very small > database (only about 2300 objects). A client performed a one-level > search retrieving the children. The server find 114 objects, but the > search was very slow: > > [06/May/2010:12:23:11 +0000] conn=127 op=149 SRCH base=<base> scope=1 > filter="(&(&(objectClass=<xyz>)(<att1>=value))(!(<att2>=TRUE)))" > > yes, the filter is a bit complex, but both attribute types <att1> and > <att2> are indexed. This search usually is fast. It looks to me that > the server is already in a funny state. > ... > [06/May/2010:12:23:17 +0000] conn=127 op=149 RESULT err=3 tag=101 > nentries=114 etime=7 err=3 is TIMELIMIT_EXCEEDED - that's probably why you aren't getting all of the results you expect, and could be why it's skipping the op. > > When the client gets the results, it iterates over those and gets its > children, like: > > [06/May/2010:12:23:17 +0000] conn=127 op=150 SRCH base=<dn of result > from previous SRCH> scope=1 > filter="(&(&(objectClass=<uvw>)(<attr3>=*))(!(<attr2>=TRUE)))" attrs=ALL. > Those searches are quick: > [06/May/2010:12:23:17 +0000] conn=127 op=150 RESULT err=0 tag=101 > nentries=1 etime=0 > > but somehow the server does not process on of the requests, when the > client iterates over the results: > > [06/May/2010:12:23:18 +0000] conn=127 op=263 SRCH base=<dn of result > from previous SRCH> scope=1 > filter="(&(&(objectClass=<uvw>)(<attr3>=*))(!(<attr2>=TRUE)))" attrs=ALL. > [06/May/2010:12:23:18 +0000] conn=127 op=263 RESULT err=0 tag=101 > nentries=1 etime=0 > [06/May/2010:12:23:26 +0000] conn=127 op=265 SRCH base=<dn of result > from previous SRCH> scope=1 > filter="(&(&(objectClass=<uvw>)(<attr3>=*))(!(<attr2>=TRUE)))" attrs=ALL. > [06/May/2010:12:23:26 +0000] conn=127 op=265 RESULT err=0 tag=101 > nentries=0 etime=0 > You can see that the server skipped op=264. It looks to me that the > request came in, but somehow the server joked up, before it could log > the request in access. > > Has anybody seen such a behavior before? > > Thanks, > -Reinhard > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > 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
