[SSSD] [PATCH] The new memberof plugin

Jan Zelený jzeleny at redhat.com
Thu Sep 22 10:27:01 UTC 2011


> Purge or expire the cache
> getent group groupthatexistsandhasmembers
> 
> I tested on an RFC2307 server.
> 
> On Sep 22, 2011, at 5:10 AM, Jan Zelený <jzeleny at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 13:24 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 17:54 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> >>>>> Attached patch rewrites almost entire memberof plugin. It heavily
> >>>>> utilizes hash tables instead of lists and arrays and it introduces
> >>>>> concept of reference counting which should heavily optimize all
> >>>>> operations when no loops are present in the user/group tree.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> I tested the patch by running sysdb test suite, all tests passed. I
> >>>>> also attach a document where basic concepts of the plugin are
> >>>>> explained.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Please note that the patch is functional, although I don't consider
> >>>>> it ready. I just want to get pre-ACK or some comments about the
> >>>>> patch design. I have yet to implement the recompute task, I will
> >>>>> work on that later.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Jan,
> >>>> yesterday I an Stephen got together to start a review of the patch.
> >>>> Due to the complexity we tried to go thorugh the code together to
> >>>> make sure we understand what is going on.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Also due to the complexity and need to refresh memory we were only be
> >>>> able to go through most of the "add" code only, we were not able to
> >>>> review the update or delete code paths yet.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Attached find a diff file with comments in C++ style (so that it is
> >>>> clear they all need to be resolved before the patch can be considered
> >>>> ok, as they show as a big red line in our editors) that you can
> >>>> integrate in your tree and check one by one.
> >>>> 
> >>>> There are some questions in there, but in general we noticed a very
> >>>> annoying lack of comments in the code itself. The accompaning PDF is
> >>>> nice and all, but unless the logic is embedded and explained in the
> >>>> code (like it was with the previous code) it will be ablocker and will
> >>>> make review more difficult.
> >>>> 
> >>>> That said, so far so good, although we need to more carefully review
> >>>> the refcounting stuff, we got to it late and only marginally reviewed
> >>>> it. Need more time to fully grasp all details.
> >>>> 
> >>>> HTH,
> >>>> Simo.
> >>> 
> >>> Simo,
> >>> as promised before, I have a new version of the patch. This time it's
> >>> complete, including the rewritten recompute task. I also took almost
> >>> all comments you and Stephen gave me into account. The only thing I
> >>> left unresolved for the moment is the last comment in the diff you
> >>> sent. The change shouldn't be difficult, but it will need changes in
> >>> many parts of the code, therefore I'll rather send it in the next
> >>> patch.
> >> 
> >> Nack
> >> 
> >> First, the third patch in this set does not compile. You used
> >> sysdb_memberof_recompute() in the test, but the function is
> >> sysdb_memberof_rebuild().
> >> 
> >> With that typo fixed, I attempted to run with this patch. Any attempt to
> >> run getgrnam() or getgrgid() results in a hang in the LDB until
> >> eventually the monitor issues a SIGTERM to the backend (which doesn't
> >> die, because it never gets back to the mainloop to process the signal).
> > 
> > Could you please send me steps how to reproduce?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Jan

Strange. I tested this exact scenario and it succeeded. I retested it a moment 
ago to be sure and it still goes fine. Could you send me some more info like a 
core dump or something?

Thanks
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/attachments/20110922/68ddb938/attachment.sig>


More information about the sssd-devel mailing list