Thanks for the answer. I just set it to 400 and let's see what happens.
At least initially looks better. This would useful information in 389 wiki?
-Vesa
On 28/11/13 11:17, Ludwig Krispenz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the message is not related to the dbcache, it is about cached aci
> evaluations and there is a default value of 200. You can increase this
> by setting the attribute nsslapd-aclpb-max-selected-acls in cn=ACL
> Plugin,cn=plugins,cn=config and restart the server. There is also a
> ticket for this:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/342
> but the fix only fixes one of two occurrencies of the error message and
> I 'm not sure if it is in your version.
>
> Regards,
> Ludwig
>
> On 11/28/2013 08:48 AM, Vesa Alho wrote:
>>> 1. I changed values using Console. But for the second LDAP server I was
>>> not able to save new nsslapd-dbcachesize value, because Save button was
>>> greyed out. I changed value using ldapmodify. But is there a reason why
>>> Save button is disabled?
>>
>> I figured out that Save button is greyed out if value is incorrect
>> (e.g. too big). So it works as it should.
>>
>> Anyways, I still get "acl__TestRights - cache overflow" error from my
>> second LDAP server which is more heavily loaded. It puzzles me because
>> I only have like less than 10 ACIs in root suffix or in OU levels.
>>
>> I found only a few references by googling. Like this old bug report:
>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=918702
>> But I couldn't find nsslapd-aclpb-max-selected-acls attribute. Do I
>> need to add it and what is default value?
>>
>> Here are my versions (latest EPEL 6 stable):
>>
>> 389-console-1.1.7-1.el6.noarch
>> 389-admin-console-1.1.8-1.el6.noarch
>> 389-admin-console-doc-1.1.8-1.el6.noarch
>> 389-ds-base-libs-1.2.11.25-1.el6.x86_64
>> 389-ds-console-doc-1.2.6-1.el6.noarch
>> 389-ds-base-1.2.11.25-1.el6.x86_64
>> 389-ds-console-1.2.6-1.el6.noarch
>> 389-ds-1.2.2-1.el6.noarch
>> 389-dsgw-1.1.10-1.el6.x86_64
>> 389-adminutil-1.1.15-1.el6.x86_64
>> 389-admin-1.1.29-1.el6.x86_64
>>
>> This issue appeared when I upgraded 389 packages via normal yum
>> updates from 1.2.11.15.
>>
>> -Vesa
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users