[389-users] Referral errors ....

Reinhard Nappert rnappert at juniper.net
Thu May 5 12:41:15 UTC 2011 

This is actually what I thought, too. It logs looked fine to me as well.

Guess what, a restart of the LDAP server did get rid of the issue!

For sure it would be nice to figure out how the system can get into this state!

-Reinhard 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins at redhat.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 6:28 PM
To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
Cc: Reinhard Nappert
Subject: Re: [389-users] Referral errors ....

On 05/04/2011 03:59 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote:
> I actually tried even a bit more 1+2+4+65536=65543.
>
> I tried to add the object uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operator s,o=UMC.
>
> I tried to add it at (from access file):
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] conn=83 op=51 SRCH 
> base="uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=o perators,o=UMC" scope=0 
> filter="(objectClass=*)" attrs=ALL
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] conn=83 op=51 RESULT err=32 tag=101 
> nentries=0 etim e=0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] conn=83 op=52 ADD 
> dn="uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=oper ators,o=UMC"
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] conn=83 op=52 RESULT err=1 tag=105 
> nentries=0 etime =0
>
> Here is what you see in errors:
>
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mapping tree release backend : userRoot
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - do_search
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - SRCH 
> base="uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=UMC" scope=0 deref=3 
> sizelimit=0 timelimit=0 attrsonly=0 filter="(objectClass=*)" attrs=ALL
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  get_ldapmessage_controls
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= get_ldapmessage_controls no controls
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  slapi_control_present (looking for 
> 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.3)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= slapi_control_present 0 (NO CONTROLS)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mtn_lock : lock count : 1
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mapping tree selected backend : 
> userRoot
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mtn_unlock : lock count : 0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> conn=0xfd42c678, handle=2
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> returning NO VALUE
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> conn=0xfd42c678, handle=1
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> returning NO VALUE
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  compute_limits: sizelimit=2000, 
> timelimit=3600
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - Calling plugin 'ACL preoperation' #1 
> type 403
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  slapi_control_present (looking for 
> 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.12)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= slapi_control_present 0 (NO CONTROLS)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  slapi_control_present (looking for 
> 2.16.840.1.113730.3.4.18)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= slapi_control_present 0 (NO CONTROLS)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - Calling plugin 'Legacy replication 
> preoperation plugin' #3 type 403
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - Calling plugin 'Multimaster replication 
> preoperation plugin' #4 type 403
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> conn=0xfd42c678, handle=0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> returning NO VALUE
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  find_entry_internal 
> (dn=uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc) lock 0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  dn2entry "uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc"
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  index_read( "entrydn" = "uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc" )
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -    indextype: "eq" indexmask: 0x2
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= index_read 0 candidates
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= dn2entry 0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  dn2ancestor "uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc"
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  dn2entry "ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc"
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= dn2entry f0cdb0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= dn2ancestor f0cdb0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= find_entry_internal_dn not found 
> (uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  send_ldap_result 32:ou=admins,o=operators,o=umc:
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= send_ldap_result
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mapping tree release backend : userRoot
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - do_add
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -     do_add: dn (uid=stibbons,ou=admins,o=operators,o=UMC)
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - slapi_entry_add_values: using an AVL 
> tree to detect duplicate values
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  get_ldapmessage_controls
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= get_ldapmessage_controls no controls
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mtn_lock : lock count : 1
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - mtn_unlock : lock count : 0
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] - =>  send_ldap_result 1::Mapping tree 
> node for o=umc is set to return a referral, but no referral is 
> configured for it
> [04/May/2011:17:40:32 -0400] -<= send_ldap_result
> [04/May/2011:17:40:33 -0400] - =>  slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> conn=0xfd42c8a8, handle=3
> [04/May/2011:17:40:33 -0400] -<= slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> returning NO VALUE
> [04/May/2011:17:40:33 -0400] - =>  slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> conn=0xfd42c790, handle=3
> [04/May/2011:17:40:33 -0400] -<= slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> returning NO VALUE
> [04/May/2011:17:40:33 -0400] - =>  slapi_reslimit_get_integer_limit() 
> conn=0xfd42c678, handle=3
>
>
> Let me know what you see.....
I don't see anything unusual.  Does this problem persist after a server restart?
> Thanks,
> -Reinhard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org 
> [mailto:389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of 
> Reinhard Nappert
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 5:32 PM
> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
> Subject: Re: [389-users] Referral errors ....
>
> Rich,
>
> I was able to get one box in this situation (not sure, how though). Do you want me do change some accesslog-levels or errorlog-levels?
>
> Now would be a good time to gather more information
>
> -Reinhard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org 
> [mailto:389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of 
> Richard Megginson
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 11:57 AM
> To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.
> Subject: Re: [389-users] Referral errors ....
>
>> No replies so far. Does this mean nobody has seen this issue before?
> I have not seen this.
>
> Any errors in the errors log?
>
>> -Reinhard
>>
>>
>> From: 389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> [mailto:389-users-bounces at lists.fedoraproject.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Reinhard Nappert
>> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 9:44 AM
>> To: 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Subject: [389-users] Referral errors ....
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>   
>> I have the following setup:
>>   
>> I have a 2 multimaster replication setup, where both masters also 
>> have a number of shadowing agreements to other consumers. The data 
>> gets replicated to all boxes and there are no issues. When I try to 
>> perform an update on the slaves, it works on all, but one. Meaning, 
>> the server sends back err=10, with the referral to one of the masters 
>> and the client automatically follows the referrals. Unfortunately, it 
>> does not works with one box:
>>   
>> When there is an attempt to write to the db, the server returns an 
>> error-code 1, with the following message:
>> javax.naming.NamingException: [LDAP: error code 1 - Mapping tree node 
>> for o=base is set to return a referral, but no referral is configured 
>> for it];
>>   
>> This can also be seen in the access file:
>>
>>
>> [ 26/Apr/2011:05:35:45 -0300] conn=3418 op=13256 ADD dn="o u = test 
>> ,o= base "
>> [26/Apr/2011:05:35:45 -0300] conn=3418 op=13256 RESULT err=1 tag=105 
>> nentries=0 etime=0
>>
>> When I have a look at the configuration, it looks exactly like the
>> others: dn: cn="o=Base",cn=mapping tree,cn=config objectClass: top
>> objectClass: extensibleObject objectClass: nsMappingTree cn: "o=Base"
>> nsslapd-state: referral on update nsslapd-backend: userRoot
>> modifiersName: cn=server,cn=plugins,cn=config modifyTimestamp:
>> 20100721202730Z nsslapd-referral: ldap://master-ld01:389/o=Base 
>> nsslapd-referral : ldap://master-ld02:389/o=Base numSubordinates : 1
>> dn: cn=replica,cn="o=Base",cn=mapping tree,cn=config
>> nsDS5ReplicaBindDN: cn=replication,cn=config nsDS5ReplicaRoot: o=Base
>> nsDS5Flags: 0 nsDS5ReplicaType: 2 nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay: 43200
>> objectClass: top objectClass: nsDS5Replica cn: replica modifiersName:
>> cn=Multimaster Replication Plugin,cn=plugins,cn=config
>> modifyTimestamp: 20110421052744Z nsDS5ReplicaId: 65535 nsState::
>> //8AAAAAAADLv69NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALSoAAAAAAAAIAAAAAAAAAA==
>> nsDS5ReplicaName: 59480b7e-94fb11df-9df8eeea-774385c0
>> nsDS5ReplicaReferral: ldap://master-ld01:389/o=Base
>> nsDS5ReplicaReferral : ldap://master-ld02:389/o=Base   I was wondering
>> if someone has seen this kind of issue. Everything looks fine to me
>> and I can not explain this behavior.   Right now, I can not reproduce
>> this issue. I only see it in this one setup.   Thanks, -Reinhard
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

More information about the 389-users mailing list