[PATCH] Assert that the objectClass is always present
requate at univention.de
Wed Mar 12 05:52:13 MDT 2014
On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 07:56:35 +1300 Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 17:37 +0100, Arvid Requate wrote:
> > Ok, how will drepl behave after the new assertion has been triggered? Will
> > this block replication full stop or will it cause the object to be
> > neglected or will it try tro re-replicate the object in the next
> > replication run?
> > * If the patch brings replication to a grinding halt that would be a show
> > stopper.
> Yes, it would do exactly that. I agree it stops the show, and in the
> case of corruption, I think that is the only safe action.
> From here what I would suggest is a new forced replication, either
> overwriting local changes totally or applying the replication merge
> logic, but asking the remote server for all objects by suggesting our
> USN is actually 0.
> > [...]
> I would suggest that this, run manually by the administrator, is the
> only safe option. It wouldn't lead to an infinite cycle because it
> would need to be administrator-run.
> Naturally, this needs to be combined with actually finding and fixing
> whatever can cause this in the first place - it should not be a natural
> part of operating a Samba domain.
Ok, I understand your points. Would it be possible to signal this situation in
some way, e.g. making "samba-tool drs showrepl" issue a specific warning/error
For us it would be important that we can automate the detection of this error
condition, maybe run some information gathering script and finally trigger the
re-replication. We might do this e.g. by some cron job or nagios check. This
is what we as distributors need to be able to.
This might also speed up the gathering of evidence around this issue, if we
could extract relevant information on the spot, possibly even from other
replicating DCs, rather than manually digging through the logs and comparing
logs on two or more DCs.
More information about the samba-technical