[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Bug#272984: marked as forwarded (slapd: checkpoint directive missed from

Subject: Bug#272984: marked as forwarded slapd: checkpoint directive missed from bdb backend
From: Debian Bug Tracking System
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:03:16 -0800
Your message dated Tue, 9 Nov 2004 01:49:47 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
has caused the Debian Bug report #272984,
regarding slapd: checkpoint directive missed from bdb backend
to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstream software
author(s) [email protected]

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Received: (at 272984-forwarded) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Nov 2004 00:52:46 +0000
>From [email protected] Mon Nov 08 16:52:46 2004
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: from tms.rz.uni-kiel.de (uni-kiel.de) [] 
        by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
        id 1CRKFa-0006CT-00; Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:52:46 -0800
Received: from amavis by uni-kiel.de with scanned-ok (Exim 4.34)
        id 1CRKF5-0000uX-NZ
        for [email protected]; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:52:15 +0100
Received: from zaphod.gpi.uni-kiel.de ([])
        by uni-kiel.de with esmtp (Exim 4.34)
        id 1CRKF3-0000uP-P1; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:52:13 +0100
Received: from localhost ([] helo=stargate.galaxy)
        by zaphod.gpi.uni-kiel.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
        id 1CRKF2-0005TL-00; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:52:12 +0100
Received: by stargate.galaxy (Postfix, from userid 1000)
        id D4AF818B46; Tue,  9 Nov 2004 01:49:47 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 01:49:47 +0100
From: Torsten Landschoff <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Checkpointing in slapd bdb backend?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (Uni-Kiel/tms)
Delivered-To: [email protected]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,=20

A Debian user reported about a missing checkpoint directive in
slapd.conf leading to data loss (see http://bugs.debian.org/272984). I
can't imagine how that would happen but I wonder why checkpointing is
only done during shutdown of slapd by default (I'd expect that to happen
really seldom).

I'd rather have the default changed if it increases data security=20
or slapd behaviour in case of a system crash. But I guess that's=20
upstreams call.=20




Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)



To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Bug#272984: marked as forwarded (slapd: checkpoint directive missed from bdb backend), Debian Bug Tracking System <=