[389-users] Replication with 1.2.7.5

[Reinhard Nappert]

Rich,

I had log level set to 8192 and still there was nothing in errors.

I did compile, build and install 1.2.6. With that, it seems to work.

I need to do some tests with 1.2.6, before I can re-build 1.2.7.5 and try to re-produce.
Are there some compelling reasons to use 1.2.7.5, instead of going with 1.2.6?

-Reinhard 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins at redhat.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 4:00 PM
To: Reinhard Nappert
Cc: 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5

On 01/07/2011 01:52 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
> No, it does not.
And no errors from ldapmodify?  What does it say in the directory server access log for the operation and result?  With log level 8192, is there anything in the errors log?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins at redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 3:47 PM
> To: Reinhard Nappert
> Cc: 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5
>
> On 01/07/2011 01:39 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
>> Rich,
>>
>> I am not sure if I tested it with any 1.2.x release. I think, I did it, but this would have been some time back.
>>
>> It is really weird that I do not see anything in errors at all. Anyway, here are the ops from the access file:
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=1 ADD dn="cn=replica,cn=o\3DUMC,cn=mapping tree,cn=config"
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=105 
>> nentries=0 etime=0
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=2 ADD dn="cn=changelog5,cn=config"
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=2 RESULT err=0 tag=105 
>> nentries=0 etime=0
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=3 MOD dn="cn=replica,cn=o\3DUMC,cn=mapping tree,cn=config"
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=3 RESULT err=0 tag=103 
>> nentries=0 etime=0
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=4 ADD dn="cn=c4000-12c4000-2,cn=replica,cn=o\3DUMC,cn=mapping tree,cn=config"
>> [07/Jan/2011:15:17:13 -0500] conn=74 op=4 RESULT err=0 tag=105 
>> nentries=0 etime=0
>>
>> You see that the operations succeeded. Here is the result of the operations:
>> dn: cn=o\3Dumc,cn=mapping tree,cn=config
>> objectClass: top
>> objectClass: extensibleObject
>> objectClass: nsMappingTree
>> cn: o=umc
>> cn: "o=umc"
>> nsslapd-state: backend
>> nsslapd-backend: userRoot
>>
>> dn: cn=replica,cn=o\3DUMC,cn=mapping tree,cn=config
>> nsDS5ReplicaBindDN: cn=replAdmin,cn=config
>> nsDS5ReplicaRoot: o=UMC
>> nsDS5ReplicaId: 4
>> nsDS5Flags: 1
>> nsDS5ReplicaType: 3
>> nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay: 43200
>> objectClass: top
>> objectClass: nsDS5Replica
>> cn: replica
>> nsDS5ReplicaReferral: ldap://c4000-2:389/o=UMC
>>
>> dn: cn=c4000-12c4000-2,cn=replica,cn=o\3DUMC,cn=mapping 
>> tree,cn=config
>> nsDS5ReplicaBindDN: cn=replAdmin,cn=config
>> nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo: LDAP
>> nsDS5ReplicaHost: c4000-2
>> nsDS5ReplicaPort: 389
>> objectClass: top
>> objectClass: nsDS5ReplicationAgreement
>> nsDS5ReplicaBindMethod: SIMPLE
>> cn: c4000-12c4000-2
>> description: c4000-12c4000-2
>> nsDS5ReplicaRoot: o=UMC
>> nsDS5ReplicaCredentials: {DES}IDgUQ80Eh2GlcB8A2TilGg==
>> nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh: start
>>
>> You see that the server does not react to the trigger start
>> (nsds5BeginReplicaRefresh)
> Does it do the refresh if you use ldapmodify to change the value of the attribute after creating the entry?
>> -Reinhard
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins at redhat.com]
>> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 3:15 PM
>> To: 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org; Reinhard Nappert
>> Subject: Re: Replication with 1.2.7.5
>>
>>    >   Hi all,
>>
>>    >   I compiled, built and installed the 389 DS 1.2.7.5 release.
>>
>>    >   I tried to configure a mm scenario (by using my customized administration application, which works with any 1.1.x release).
>>
>> Have you successfully used it with any 1.2.x release?
>>
>>    >   When I initialize the agreement, nothing happens and I do not see any logs in errors, although I changed the error log level to 8192.
>>
>>    >   My application creates the cn=changelog5, cn=config entry as well as the cn=replica entry and the agreement cn=<agreement>,cn=replica entry underneath the cn=<suffix>,cn=mapping tree, cn=config entry.
>>
>>    >   Did the administration of replication (and agreements) change?
>>
>> No - can you post excerpts from your access logs showing the operations that add these entries, along with the results of those operations?
>> There is nothing in the error log showing any problems?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Reinhard