Hi, I encountered the following logs in the errors: [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? Thanks -Reinhard -- 389 users mailing list 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

How do I do this manually on server A? The other question is, what kind of impact does it have when I re-iitialize server B? To be more precise, my replication environment is more complex than just server A and server B. In fact, I have a setup like the following: srv C <--> srv A <--> srv B <--> srv D <--> srv C /\ /\ | | \/ \/ srv E srv F I don't want to end up to re-initialize all boxes in my environment.

Thanks, -Reinhard ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Marc Sauton [mailto:msauton@redhat.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: > Hi, > I encountered the following logs in the errors: > [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged > [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. > [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action > > Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? > > Thanks > -Reinhard > > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users On server A, read a changelog to manually run the changes on server B. May be tune up nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay if such errors somehow appears regularly. Otherwise, like the errors log says, the change was purged/removed, and replica need a re-init. M. -- 389 users mailing list 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Rich, I was thinking about the "Replica has a different generation ID than the local data." error, because I have seen this before. If possible, I want to avoid that I have to go though each box and re-initialize. So, you suggest I take let's say D (or A) and re-initialize B with D's data. Then, I would have to re-initialize F from B, right?

Let's go a bit further: If I had an agreement from A to F (and vice versa), I would not even have to re-initialize F from B. Is this correct?

-Reinhard ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:00 PM *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert; Marc Sauton *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/11/2011 02:41 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: > How do I do this manually on server A? > The other question is, what kind of impact does it have when I > re-iitialize server B? To be more precise, my replication environment > is more complex than just server A and server B. In fact, I have a > setup like the following: > srv C <--> srv A <--> srv B <--> srv D <--> srv C > /\ /\ > | | > \/ \/ > srv E srv F > I don't want to end up to re-initialize all boxes in my environment. Assuming C and D are up to date and don't have any problems, reinitializing B should affect only B and F. > Thanks, > -Reinhard > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Marc Sauton [mailto:msauton@redhat.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM > *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. > *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert > *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue > > On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >> Hi, >> I encountered the following logs in the errors: >> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged >> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. >> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action >> >> Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? >> >> Thanks >> -Reinhard >> >> >> -- >> 389 users mailing list >> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users > On server A, read a changelog to manually run the changes on server B. > May be tune up nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay if such errors somehow appears > regularly. > Otherwise, like the errors log says, the change was purged/removed, > and replica need a re-init. > M. > > > -- > 389 users mailing list > 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Good. what about the different generation ID message? Is it possible that this could be caused by a re-initialize?

But then, I thought a re-initialize would fix this error, if it occurs.

-Reinhard ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:11 PM *To:* Reinhard Nappert *Cc:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; Marc Sauton *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/12/2011 02:08 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: > Rich, > I was thinking about the "Replica has a different generation ID than > the local data." error, because I have seen this before. If possible, > I want to avoid that I have to go though each box and re-initialize. > So, you suggest I take let's say D (or A) and re-initialize B with > D's data. Then, I would have to re-initialize F from B, right? Right. > Let's go a bit further: If I had an agreement from A to F (and vice > versa), I would not even have to re-initialize F from B. Is this correct? Assuming the AtoF agreement is not complaining about "unable to find CSN" and "data reload", then yes. > -Reinhard > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:00 PM > *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. > *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert; Marc Sauton > *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue > > On 10/11/2011 02:41 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >> How do I do this manually on server A? >> The other question is, what kind of impact does it have when I >> re-iitialize server B? To be more precise, my replication >> environment is more complex than just server A and server B. In >> fact, I have a setup like the following: >> srv C <--> srv A <--> srv B <--> srv D <--> srv C >> /\ /\ >> | | >> \/ \/ >> srv E srv F >> I don't want to end up to re-initialize all boxes in my environment. > Assuming C and D are up to date and don't have any problems, > reinitializing B should affect only B and F. >> Thanks, >> -Reinhard >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Marc Sauton [mailto:msauton@redhat.com] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM >> *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >> *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert >> *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue >> >> On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>> Hi, >>> I encountered the following logs in the errors: >>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged >>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. >>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action >>> >>> Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Reinhard >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 389 users mailing list >>> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users >> On server A, read a changelog to manually run the changes on server B. >> May be tune up nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay if such errors somehow appears >> regularly. >> Otherwise, like the errors log says, the change was purged/removed, >> and replica need a re-init. >> M. >> >> >> -- >> 389 users mailing list >> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users >

Hi Rich, actually just restarting srvA seems to have cleared the replication issue. It looks like replication is working fine now, but I see now the following error log: [18/Oct/2011:13:09:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): changelog iteration code returned a dummy entry with csn 4e9d7bc2000000080000, skipping ... I think that we can ignore this message, right? But, how can I get rid of this message, since it is generated quite often?

Any ideas? -Reinhard ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:29 PM *To:* Reinhard Nappert *Cc:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; Marc Sauton *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/12/2011 02:16 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: > Good. > what about the different generation ID message? Is it possible that > this could be caused by a re-initialize? Yes. > But then, I thought a re-initialize would fix this error, if it occurs. In this case, it should fix this problem. > -Reinhard > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:11 PM > *To:* Reinhard Nappert > *Cc:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; > Marc Sauton > *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue > > On 10/12/2011 02:08 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >> Rich, >> I was thinking about the "Replica has a different generation ID than >> the local data." error, because I have seen this before. If >> possible, I want to avoid that I have to go though each box and >> re-initialize. >> So, you suggest I take let's say D (or A) and re-initialize B with >> D's data. Then, I would have to re-initialize F from B, right? > Right. >> Let's go a bit further: If I had an agreement from A to F (and vice >> versa), I would not even have to re-initialize F from B. Is this >> correct? > Assuming the AtoF agreement is not complaining about "unable to find > CSN" and "data reload", then yes. >> -Reinhard >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:00 PM >> *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >> *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert; Marc Sauton >> *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue >> >> On 10/11/2011 02:41 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>> How do I do this manually on server A? >>> The other question is, what kind of impact does it have when I >>> re-iitialize server B? To be more precise, my replication >>> environment is more complex than just server A and server B. In >>> fact, I have a setup like the following: >>> srv C <--> srv A <--> srv B <--> srv D <--> srv C >>> /\ /\ >>> | | >>> \/ \/ >>> srv E srv F >>> I don't want to end up to re-initialize all boxes in my environment. >> Assuming C and D are up to date and don't have any problems, >> reinitializing B should affect only B and F. >>> Thanks, >>> -Reinhard >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From:* Marc Sauton [mailto:msauton@redhat.com] >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM >>> *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>> *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert >>> *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue >>> >>> On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> I encountered the following logs in the errors: >>>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged >>>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. >>>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action >>>> >>>> Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -Reinhard >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 389 users mailing list >>>> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users >>> On server A, read a changelog to manually run the changes on server B. >>> May be tune up nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay if such errors somehow >>> appears regularly. >>> Otherwise, like the errors log says, the change was purged/removed, >>> and replica need a re-init. >>> M. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 389 users mailing list >>> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users >> >

ok, I will. Do I have to worry about it, though? It looks like replication is working, but I want to make sure ....

-Reinhard ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, October 18, 2011 10:39 AM *To:* Reinhard Nappert *Cc:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; Marc Sauton *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue On 10/18/2011 08:13 AM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: > Hi Rich, > actually just restarting srvA seems to have cleared the replication > issue. It looks like replication is working fine now, > but I see now the following error log: > > [18/Oct/2011:13:09:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - > agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): changelog iteration code returned a > dummy entry with csn 4e9d7bc2000000080000, skipping ... > > I think that we can ignore this message, right? But, how can I get rid of this message, since it is generated quite often? Unfortunately, you can't get rid of that message. Please file a bug. > > Any ideas? > -Reinhard > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:29 PM > *To:* Reinhard Nappert > *Cc:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; > Marc Sauton > *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue > > On 10/12/2011 02:16 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >> Good. >> what about the different generation ID message? Is it possible that >> this could be caused by a re-initialize? > Yes. >> But then, I thought a re-initialize would fix this error, if it occurs. > In this case, it should fix this problem. >> -Reinhard >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:11 PM >> *To:* Reinhard Nappert >> *Cc:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project.; >> Marc Sauton >> *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue >> >> On 10/12/2011 02:08 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>> Rich, >>> I was thinking about the "Replica has a different generation ID >>> than the local data." error, because I have seen this before. If >>> possible, I want to avoid that I have to go though each box and >>> re-initialize. >>> So, you suggest I take let's say D (or A) and re-initialize B with >>> D's data. Then, I would have to re-initialize F from B, right? >> Right. >>> Let's go a bit further: If I had an agreement from A to F (and vice >>> versa), I would not even have to re-initialize F from B. Is this >>> correct? >> Assuming the AtoF agreement is not complaining about "unable to find >> CSN" and "data reload", then yes. >>> -Reinhard >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From:* Rich Megginson [mailto:rmeggins@redhat.com] >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 12, 2011 4:00 PM >>> *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>> *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert; Marc Sauton >>> *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue >>> >>> On 10/11/2011 02:41 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>> How do I do this manually on server A? >>>> The other question is, what kind of impact does it have when I >>>> re-iitialize server B? To be more precise, my replication >>>> environment is more complex than just server A and server B. In >>>> fact, I have a setup like the following: >>>> srv C <--> srv A <--> srv B <--> srv D <--> srv C >>>> /\ /\ >>>> | | >>>> \/ \/ >>>> srv E srv F >>>> I don't want to end up to re-initialize all boxes in my environment. >>> Assuming C and D are up to date and don't have any problems, >>> reinitializing B should affect only B and F. >>>> Thanks, >>>> -Reinhard >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> *From:* Marc Sauton [mailto:msauton@redhat.com] >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:36 PM >>>> *To:* General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. >>>> *Cc:* Reinhard Nappert >>>> *Subject:* Re: [389-users] Replication issue >>>> >>>> On 10/11/2011 01:22 PM, Reinhard Nappert wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> I encountered the following logs in the errors: >>>>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - changelog program - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): CSN 4e8d804a0000000c0000 not found, we aren't as up to date, or we purged >>>>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Data required to update replica has been purged. The replica must be reinitialized. >>>>> [06/Oct/2011:10:11:57 +0000] NSMMReplicationPlugin - agmt="cn=srvAtosrvB" (srvB:389): Incremental update failed and requires administrator action >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone have an idea, what could have caused this and more importantly, how to fix this? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Reinhard >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 389 users mailing list >>>>> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users >>>> On server A, read a changelog to manually run the changes on server B. >>>> May be tune up nsds5ReplicaPurgeDelay if such errors somehow >>>> appears regularly. >>>> Otherwise, like the errors log says, the change was >>>> purged/removed, and replica need a re-init. >>>> M. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 389 users mailing list >>>> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users >>> >> >