Hi Reinhard,
That was an unfortunate... I was hoping you were using a newer version.
:) You hit this bug.
*Bug 472131* <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472131>
-dbverify: when a duplicate is large enough to have internal page(s),
dbverify issues bogus out-of-order key errors
The bug was fixed by Sleepycat on db4.8. And we ported the fix back to
4.3, but no chance to do so to 4.2. So, we cannot use dbverify to check
if the index file is healthy or not... Could it be possible to reindex
the ancestorid index and see if the error goes away? (Or you could
reinitialize the consumer? That would be the cleanest)
Thanks,
--noriko
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi Noriko,
I run it on a CentOS 4.4 box (Linux 2.6.24). I use the db 4.2 libs
with all the patches.
Oh, yes dbverify does complain a lot. I see for all of the db files
messages like:
[20/May/2011:11:03:05 -0400] DB verify - verify failed(-30976):
/var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-ID/db/userRoot/cn.db4
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 2
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 5
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 8
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 10
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 13
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 16
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 19
[20/May/2011:11:03:06 -0400] - libdb: Page 5: out-of-order key at entry 21
[20/May/2011:11:03:07 -0400] DB verify - verify failed(-30976):
/var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-ID/db/userRoot/parentid.db4
DB verify: Passed
This said, I guess I should re-index the entire db. Any idea, why this is
happening?
Right now, I have a 2 MMR setup, where both masters also have a
replication agreement to a third box, which is a dedicated consumer. I
do run tests, where I perform simultaneously adds and deletes (not on
the same object) on all three boxes. I just want to verify how
replication behaves in 1.2.8.
-Reinhard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] *On Behalf Of
*Noriko Hosoi
*Sent:* Thursday, May 19, 2011 5:33 PM
*To:* 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
*Subject:* Re: [389-users] db import failure, when setting replication up
Hi Reinhard,
Could you tell me the OS version and Berkeley DB version (rpm -q db4)?
Could you run "/usr/lib[64]/dirsrv/slapd-ID/dbverify"? Does it
complain anything? Especially, the ancestorid index? If it does, you
may want to re-create the corrupted index...
--noriko
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Noriko,
I observed one more item, which does not bother me right now, but you
may want to see:
I am not sure why and how it happened, but I see the following
message on the supplier:
[18/May/2011:13:59:50 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin -
agmt="cn=supplier2consumer" (consumer:389): Consumer failed to replay
change (uniqueid aea3731d-808711e0-83d5fdc8-f32b8f3c, CSN
4dd4085b004800040000): Operations error. Will retry later.
And I see the following on the consumer:
[18/May/2011:13:59:29 -0400] - idl_new.c BAD 22, err=-30988
DB_PAGE_NOTFOUND: Requested page not found
[18/May/2011:13:59:29 -0400] - ancestorid BAD 13120, err=-30988
DB_PAGE_NOTFOUND: Requested page not found
Any idea, what happened there....
Thanks,
-Reinhard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] *On Behalf Of
*Noriko Hosoi
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 17, 2011 4:02 PM
*To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
*Subject:* Re: [389-users] db import failure, when setting replication up
Hi Reinhard,
Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi Noriko,
I have to correct myself. The box which had the import issue was on
a 1.2.7.5 system. The other box was running 1.2.8.2.
So, it looks like you have fixed the issue with 1.2.8.2.
*relieved* Thanks for testing it on 1.2.8.2!
--noriko
Thanks,
-Reinhard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] *On Behalf Of
*Reinhard Nappert
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 17, 2011 3:21 PM
*To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
*Subject:* Re: [389-users] db import failure, when setting
replication up
1.2.8.2
-Reinhard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* 389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[mailto:389-users-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org] *On Behalf Of
*Noriko Hosoi
*Sent:* Tuesday, May 17, 2011 2:16 PM
*To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
*Subject:* Re: [389-users] db import failure, when setting
replication up
It looks to me you have hit this bug... Which version of
389-ds-base you are running?
*Bug 684996*
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=684996> -Exported
tombstone cannot be imported correctly.
The patch should be in the version 1.2.8.2.
Thanks,
--noriko
On 05/17/2011 11:03 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
Hi,
I have seen the following:
I set 2 systems up in MMR. Replication worked. For some reason, I
needed to take one of the boxes out of the replication and disabled
replication. Later on, I enabled it again and created the shadowing
agreement to the other box. Now, I saw the following errors during
the import of the db:
[17/May/2011:11:46:04 -0400] NSMMReplicationPlugin -
multimaster_be_state_change
: replica o=base is going offline; disabling replication
[17/May/2011:11:46:07 -0400] - WARNING: Import is running with
nsslapd-db-privat
e-import-mem on; No other process is allowed to access the database
[17/May/2011:11:46:08 -0400] - import userRoot: WARNING: Skipping
entry "nsuniqu
eid=06869502-7fe011e0-8f589300-7e7b2163,ou=sample,o=base" which has
no parent,
ending at line 0 of file "(bulk import)"
[17/May/2011:11:46:08 -0400] - import userRoot: WARNING: bad entry:
ID 453
.....
Any idea, what is going on there?
Thanks,
-Reinhard
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
