Good. what about the different generation ID message? Is it possible that this could be caused by a re-initialize?
But then, I thought a re-initialize would fix this error, if it occurs. -Reinhard ________________________________ From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:11 PM To: Reinhard Nappert Cc: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; Marc Sauton Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/12/2011 02:08 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: Rich, I was thinking about the "Replica has a different generation ID than the local data." error, because I have seen this before. If possible, I want to avoid that I have to go though each box and re-initialize. So, you suggest I take let's say D (or A) and re-initialize B with D's data. Then, I would have to re-initialize F from B, right? Right. Let's go a bit further: If I had an agreement from A to F (and vice versa), I would not even have to re-initialize F from B. Is this correct? Assuming the AtoF agreement is not complaining about "unable to find CSN" and "data reload", then yes. -Reinhard ________________________________ From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmegg...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:00 PM To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. Cc: Reinhard Nappert; Marc Sauton Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/11/2011 02:41 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: How do I do this manually on server A? The other question is, what kind of impact does it have when I re-iitialize server B? To be more precise, my replication environment is more complex than just server A and server B. In fact, I have a setup like the following: srv C <--> srv A <--> srv B <--> srv D <--> srv C /\ /\ | | \/ \/ srv E srv F I don't want to end up to re-initialize all boxes in my environment. Assuming C and D are up to date and don't have any problems, reinitializing B should affect only B and F. Thanks, -Reinhard ________________________________ From: Marc Sauton [mailto:msau...@redhat.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. Cc: Reinhard Nappert Subject: Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: Hi, I encountered the following logs in the errors: [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? Thanks -Reinhard -- 389 users mailing list 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org<mailto:389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users On server A, read a changelog to manually run the changes on server B. May be tune up nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay if such errors somehow appears regularly. Otherwise, like the errors log says, the change was purged/removed, and replica need a re-init. M. -- 389 users mailing list 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org<mailto: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
