Reinhard Nappert wrote: > Actually I tried this. > > First, I just deleted the attributes nsds50ruv, which was fine, from an ldap operational point of view, but when I wanted to set replication up again, the server complained with an operation error (nds50ruv attribute missing). Right, you cannot just delete the attribute, you have to delete the entire entry. > Then I though I just delete the entire entry (nsuniqueid=ffffffff-ffffffff-ffffffff-ffffffff,dc=your,dc=suffix). > This crashes the ldap server! > > Why does it not help, if I don't get rid of it? Since the info stays in there, even after replication was disabled, I can not use this entry in order to determine whether the server was already initialized, when I enable replication for a second time. > > I think, I found a solution to this by using some objects from my internal framework. > > However, the ldap server should not crash, when I try to delete this entry > I think we fixed that crashing bug a while ago. Can you post a stack trace? > -Reinhard > > -----Original Message----- > From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Megginson > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 4:44 PM > To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. > Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup > > Reinhard Nappert wrote: > >> Thanks Rich. >> >> When does the server delete the RUV entry? >> After I set the server back to "standalone", by removing the changelog entry, all agreements and the replica entry, I still see the RUV entry: >> ldapsearch -D <Directory Manager> -w <password> -b dc=your,dc=suffix >> -x -LLL "(&(nsuniqueid=*)(objectclass=nsTombstone))" nsds50ruv >> dn: nsuniqueid=ffffffff-ffffffff-ffffffff-ffffffff,dc=your,dc=suffix >> nsds50ruv: {replicageneration} 4c61bf2e000000010000 >> nsds50ruv: {replica 7 ldap://yale:389} >> nsds50ruv: {replica 6 ldap://mustrum:389} >> nsds50ruv: {replica 1 ldap://louise:389} 4c62a60c000000010000 >> 4c62a60c000000010000 >> nsds50ruv: {replica 4 ldap://nix:389} 4c61c172000000040000 >> 4c62c59c000000040000 >> nsds50ruv: {replica 3 ldap://yale:389} 4c62a5c5000000030000 >> 4c62a5f1000000030000 >> nsds50ruv: {replica 2 ldap://mustrum:389} >> nsds50ruv: {replica 8 ldap://nix:389} 4c62d029000000080000 >> 4c62efcc000000080000 >> nsds50ruv: {replica 5 ldap://louise:389} 4c62d1b9000000050000 >> 4c62d1b9000000050000 >> >> I would expect that this would have been deleted by the server. >> > No, but you should be able to manually delete it. It doesn't do anything if you're using replication. > >> If not, this appraoch does not help. >> >> > Why? > >> -Reinhard >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich >> Megginson >> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 12:32 PM >> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >> >> Reinhard Nappert wrote: >> >> >>> So, >>> Is there a way to find out if a server was used for the initialization of other servers? >>> >>> >>> >> You can query the RUV entry in the server: >> ldapsearch -s one -b "dc=your,dc=suffix" >> "(objectclass=nsTombstone)(nsuniqueid=ffffffff-ffffffff-ffffffff-ffffffff)" >> The generation is a CSN. The first 8 bytes are the timestamp. The >> next >> 4 bytes are the sequence number. The next 4 bytes are the replica ID of the original master. >> If there is no RUV, or the generation is missing, the server has either not been configured for replication, or has not been initialized. >> >> >>> I am still not convinced that this is the cause, because when I add another server as a consumer (E) to A and I do a initReplication(E, A) I run into the same issue. >>> >>> >>> >> If you initReplication(A, D), then initReplication(E, A) you may run into the issue. >> >> >>> -Reinhard >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich >>> Megginson >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:12 AM >>> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >>> >>> Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Rick, >>>> >>>> Are you saying that, once I have replicated the data from A to B and from B to C and from C to D, I don't replicate it from D to A? If so, can you explain why? Anyway, this step works! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> If you replace the word "replicated" with "initialized", then yes, you don't initialize from D to A. Although it may work, I think it may introduce subtle errors, such as the ones you see. >>> >>> >>> >>>> So, 15 and 18 are up-to-date at this stage. Since the entire setup is done kind of automatically, the setting of nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh to start is always done, if the corresponding agreement exists on the remote box. Is there a way to find out when I have to set nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh to start? >>>> >>>> In any case, this does not explain that I fix the issue by resetting nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh to start, once I run into this issue. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I'm not exactly sure why you are seeing the errors you are seeing, >>> nor why you can fix the issue with start refresh. I do know that you >>> should not re-initialize a server that has been used to initialize other servers. >>> >>> >>> >>>> -Reinhard >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich >>>> Megginson >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 10:37 AM >>>> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>>> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >>>> >>>> Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> To explain it a bit easier, I define two "methods": >>>>> 1. createAgreement(<remote ldap>): <-- creates locally replication agreement for remote ldap >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaType=3 >>>>> nsDS5Flags=1 >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaId=<unique id> >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaHost=<hostname of remote ldap> >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo=LDAP >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaPort=389 >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaBindDN=<replManager-DN> >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaBindMethod=SIMPLE >>>>> nsDS5ReplicaCredentials=<replManager-Password> >>>>> >>>>> 2. initReplication(<local ldap>, <remote ldap>): <-- modifies the existing remote replication agreement for the local ldap >>>>> nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh=start >>>>> >>>>> So, the order is the following: >>>>> 1. On A: createAgreement(B) >>>>> 2. On B: createAgreement(A) >>>>> 3. On B: initReplication(B, A) >>>>> 4. On B: createAgreement(C) >>>>> 5. On C: createAgreement(B) >>>>> 6. On C: initReplication(C, B) >>>>> 7. On C: createAgreement(D) >>>>> 8. On D: createAgreement(C) >>>>> 9. On D: initReplication(D, C) >>>>> 10. On D: createAgreement(A) >>>>> 11. On A: createAgreement(D) >>>>> 12. On A: initReplication(A, D) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> 12 is a problem - you don't initialize the master (A) you started >>>> from >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Now, I have the ring A<-->B<-->C<-->D<-->A. All of this works fine! >>>>> Then, I want to create the cross-references from A to C and B to D 13. >>>>> On A: createAgreement(C) 14. On C: createAgreement(A) 15. On C: >>>>> initReplication(C, A) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> 15 is a problem - C has already been initialized >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> After step 15, I run into this issue. The same thing happens, when I set B and D up. >>>>> 16. On B: createAgreement(D) >>>>> 17. On D: createAgreement(B) >>>>> 18. On D: initReplication(D, B) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> 18 is a problem - D has already been initialized >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> -Reinhard >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >>>>> Rich Megginson >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 10:09 AM >>>>> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>>>> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >>>>> >>>>> Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> At first I create (besides the changelog and replica entry with nsDS5ReplicaType=3, nsDS5Flags=1 and an unique nsDS5ReplicaId) the shadowing agreement with nsDS5ReplicaHost=<hostname of remote server>, nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo=LDAP, nsDS5ReplicaPort=389, nsDS5ReplicaBindDN=<replManager-DN>, nsDS5ReplicaBindMethod=SIMPLE, nsDS5ReplicaCredentials=<replManager-Password> on both sides, let's say A and D (A first and then D). >>>>>> Then, I do initiate the replication by setting nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh to start on A. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> And you do that for A -> B, A -> C? How do you initialize D? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -Reinhard >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >>>>>> Rich Megginson >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 5:57 PM >>>>>> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>>>>> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >>>>>> >>>>>> Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Rich, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have an setup like: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A <-----> B >>>>>>> /\ \ / /\ >>>>>>> | \ / | >>>>>>> | \/ | >>>>>>> | / \ | >>>>>>> | / \ | >>>>>>> /\/ \ /\ >>>>>>> D <-----> C >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At first, I do set the agreements up for the Ring A to B to C to B to A. This works. Then, I try to set the cross agreements from A to C and B to D up. This is where I run into this issue. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let's have a look how I do those cross agreements. First I add an >>>>>>> agreement on A for C. This is fine. Then, I do the same on C (for >>>>>>> A) and I get the messages NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=nix2mustrum" (mustrum:389): Received error 89: NULL for total update operation On C and on A I get: >>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:17:12:37 -0400] - somehow, there are still 16 >>>>>>> entries in the entry cache. :/ >>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:17:12:38 -0400] - WARNING: Import is running with >>>>>>> nsslapd-db-private-import-mem on; No other process is allowed to >>>>>>> access the database >>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:17:12:38 -0400] - BAD CACHE ASSERTION at >>>>>>> ../ldap/servers/slapd/back-ldbm/cache.c/765: e->ep_refcnt > 0 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hope, this helps. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> How do you do the replica init? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> -Reinhard >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >>>>>>> Reinhard Nappert >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 2:42 PM >>>>>>> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rich, on the consumer, I see the following messages: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=nix2mustrum" (mustrum:389): >>>>>>> Received error 89: NULL for total update operation >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Reinhard >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: 389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>> [mailto:389-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >>>>>>> Rich Megginson >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 12:41 PM >>>>>>> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [389-users] Multi-Master setup >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have seen the following message in the errors log file, when I >>>>>>>> set MMR agreements up: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:44 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - >>>>>>>> repl_set_mtn_referrals: could not set referrals for replica o=base: >>>>>>>> 1 >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:44 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin - >>>>>>>> multimaster_be_state_change: replica o=base is going offline; >>>>>>>> disabling replication >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:46 -0400] - somehow, there are still 20 >>>>>>>> entries in the entrycache. :/ >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:46 -0400] - WARNING: Import is running with >>>>>>>> nsslapd-db-private-import-mem on; No other process is allowed to >>>>>>>> access the database >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:48 -0400] - BAD CACHE ASSERTION at >>>>>>>> ../ldap/servers/slapd/back-ldbm/cache.c/765: e->ep_refcnt > 0 >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:52 -0400] - Fedora-Directory/1.1.2 >>>>>>>> B2009.090.1643 starting up >>>>>>>> [10/Aug/2010:11:46:52 -0400] - Detected Disorderly Shutdown last >>>>>>>> time DirectoryServer was running, recovering database. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> After I re-initialize the database from the supplier (setting >>>>>>>> attribute nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh to start of the agreement >>>>>>>> object), the database gets correctly imported. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any idea, what is going on? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, not sure. But if you can develop a reproducible test case, that would be helpful. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 >>> -- >>> 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 >> >> > > -- > 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
