Re: [Samba] possible to use ldbedit in a safe way
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:04:59 +0200
- From: mj via samba <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Samba] possible to use ldbedit in a safe way
On 10/16/2017 08:56 PM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Not sure. But in another thread I reported some issues on replication,
highwatermark notifications, high COU load, etc.
Are they breaking anything?
My idea was do try several things to fix this. SO I created a
virtualised isolated environment, in which I can try out all kinds of
- upgrading the DCs to 4.7 (as suggested by you)
- add a fresh 4.7 dc, see how that works out
- try the clone-dc-database
- try to make dbcheck complete without errors, to rule that out.
If so, can you get me more detail on exactly what breaks?
So I'm not sure if there is a relation or not. :-|
Understood, but I'm not sure that my dangling link break anything. It's
just that in case of an issue, the natural thing is: first try to make
dbcheck finish without errors. :-)
If we have painted ourselves into a corner, and can no longer ignore
these dangling forward links, an improved dbcheck rule is probably the
right answer, and I would rather get you a patch than have you edit the
Finally, for those that have already edited a backend DB, running
'samba-tool dbcheck --reindex' on the sam.ldb is a must, to ensure the
index values are correctly re-calculated.
I understand that most parts of sam.lbd are replicated between DCs, but
from what I can read, some items are also non-replicated, so local-DC-only.
Would I be ok to say: things that are replicated are more dangurous to
edit using lbdedit than things that stay local to a specific DC?
(as long as you run --reindex afterwards)
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the