[389-devel] Re: Please review 48992: Total init may fail if the pushed schema is rejected

On 09/26/2016 11:13 AM, thierry bordaz wrote:
>
>
> On 09/23/2016 11:31 AM, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
>> Hi Thierry,
>>
>> the description in the commit is now fine, but given that the choice
>> of LDAP_CONSTRAINT_VIOLATION is a bit arbitrary it would be good to
>> have a comment where it is set, explaining why this error code was used.
>> About which error code to choose, if you have to pick one of the
>> errors which will allow "keep_going" it is fine, although I think the
>> original choice of unwilling to perform was a better match,
>> operations_error or ldap_other would, in my opinion, also be good
>> candidates - but they are in the wrong category.
>
> Thanks Ludwig. You are right, it is missing the comment in the code.
> I added the commend and also fixed an incorrect url in the bug
> description
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48992/0003-Ticket-48992-Total-init-may-fail-if-the-pushed-schem.patch
>
ok, thanks
>>
>> Looking at ignore_error_and_keep_going, I am wondering if this
>> partition in go|stop is really still correct ? maybe we should
>> investigate this as well.
>
> ignore_error_and_keep_going is used on both consumer and supplier
> sides. On both sides it lets the replication session continuing on
> "transient" error. I wonder if there is not something wrong. I think
> it is fine to continue replication on minor (syntax, duplicate values,
> ...) failures but the failed update is silently skipped. Just an error
> is logged on the supplier side, with a invalid statement: "Will retry
> later" that is false the update will be simply skipped.
> Do you think we could create a conflict entry with the op parameters
> that were skipped ?
I am not sure, I just noticed when looking at
ignore_error_and_keep_going() that there might be situations where
behaviour should be double checked.
maybe you should open an other ticket to investigate this
>
> thanks
> theirry
>>
>> Ludwig
>>
>> On 09/23/2016 10:08 AM, thierry bordaz wrote:
>>> Thanks Noriko for your review. I updated the patch to give more
>>> explanation why the fix is in modify_schema_dse.
>>> I pick up LDAP_CONSTRAINT_VIOLATION in replacement of
>>> UNWILLING_TO_PERFORM but I have not strong opinion on appropriate
>>> value of that returned value. In the logic of that fix, it just
>>> needs to be not fatal regarding ignore_error_and_keep_going.
>>>
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/389/attachment/ticket/48992/0002-Ticket-48992-Total-init-may-fail-if-the-pushed-schem.patch
>>>
>>>
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48992
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org

--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham, Michael O'Neill, Eric Shander
_______________________________________________
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org