Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:50:15 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478 adding contact to chained ldap slave server causes error message when a contact is added to turba, it would appear a search is made to confirm the record has been added however if the server that receives the update uses chaining and syncrepl the update may not have made it back to the slave slave in time for the search to find it, this causes an error message "There was an error adding the new contact. Contact your system administrator for further help." Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:48:42 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49612 Any suggestions how to work around this? Sat, 11 Oct 2008 16:40:16 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49617 > Any suggestions how to work around this? I'd guess the ldap driver provides a success/failure code at the point the write request is made, I'd take this as success. Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:59:44 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49660 But the problem happens when displaying the contact, not adding it, right? Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:21:25 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49667 > But the problem happens when displaying the contact, not adding it, right? nope, problem comes during adding the contact, it will be displayed because syncrepl delay is very small from my reading of the code (./turba/lib/Forms/AddContact.php) the record is added (line 82) $key = $driver->add($contact); then the same record is searched for (line 86) $ob = $driver->getObject($key); this is what is causing the error Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:33:53 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49668 Mmm, true; but, if we remove that, then you still might hit an error on the display page after the redirect. So just removing that check doesn't seem like it'll really solve the problem. Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:01:25 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49703 > Mmm, true; but, if we remove that, then you still might hit an error > on the display page after the redirect. So just removing that check > doesn't seem like it'll really solve the problem. I'd suggest that the add function isn't the right place to make the check though. If ldap confirms it was added successfully then the add function should be happy. Perhaps the code that displays an entry could retry a few times with a short sleep in-between if it fails to find an object? For example four, quarter second, sleeps would minimise wait time, and still give up to a second for replication. Obviously those particular values might not be appropriate, I don't know how long the sync might take, but something along those lines? Wed, 15 Oct 2008 13:42:46 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49713 I'm seeing a replication delay of around 1 sec. Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:54:00 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49743 The IMAP ACL code has a sleep() between setting and getting to get around a similar propagation delay in older versions of Cyrus IMAP when using a Murder environment. http://cvs.horde.org/annotate.php/framework/IMAP/IMAP/ACL/rfc2086.php?rev=1.32#l175 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:36:26 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49749 I'm not happy about adding a delay for all backends that in most cases will just slow users down pointlessly. I could see getting rid of the read, I guess, but then you're likely to get this error when redirecting to the new contact. I don't know enough about LDAP to know how common this is and how much it's worth compromising everyone else's experience because of it. Fri, 24 Oct 2008 01:09:56 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49933 > I'm not happy about adding a delay for all backends that in most > cases will just slow users down pointlessly. I could see getting rid > of the read, I guess, but then you're likely to get this error when > redirecting to the new contact. > > I don't know enough about LDAP to know how common this is and how > much it's worth compromising everyone else's experience because of it. Sure, I can see that. How about searching immediately, then try again one second later if you fail, with one further retry. That should avoid a delay for those that don't need it, but allow some leeway for those that do. Probably not hugely common setup, but hopefully this suggestion can avoid that. Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:54:50 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t49937 I'm okay with that if it works for you. Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:33:11 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t50007 Changes have been made in CVS for this ticket: http://cvs.horde.org/diff.php/turba/docs/CHANGES?r1=1.465&r2=1.466&ty=u http://cvs.horde.org/diff.php/turba/lib/Forms/AddContact.php?r1=1.10&r2=1.11&ty=u Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:29:21 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t50012 Done for 2.3.1. Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:32:03 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7478#t50013