El lun, 09-11-2009 a las 14:12 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard escribió: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 01:07:24PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > >[José L. Redrejo Rodríguez] > >> Sure, that's one of the needed things. Also, this should also be > >> "daemonized" > > > >Perhaps, or just run from cron. The latter is easier, but require > >cron to be functional. :) > > > >> do you have any idea of a practical time interval to wait between > >> requests? > > > >Not sure what is needed to maximize the changes of success, but I > >would go with 3 tries with 5 seconds between them, and hope that was > >enough. > > If it is known what causes unreliability - e.g. LDAP sometimes > unresponsive - then perhaps extend the script to do e.g. simple direct > LDAP queries to verify if getent responses are likely to be reliable. > > (sorry if I misunderstood - I haven't followed this thread closely). I think that, as getent request are done via nscd that's caching data, You have two scenaries: - ldap might be having a bad moment, but the data can be got through nscd - ldap might respond to a query, but a few milliseconds later be unresponsive and getent through nscd through nslcd might fail. So, two or three tries seems safer for me to be (aprox) sure the server is unresponsive.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente