2.4.42 is a bug fix release for significant issues that were in 2.4.41. No new features were added. Primarily for bugs in slapd-mdb and the lmdb library itself. I would upgrade to 2.4.42.
As for your question about different versions there is no issue replicating between 2.4.39 and 2.4.41 or .42 I would note that Howard checked in some potential syncrepl optimizations for slapd-mdb into the master branch this week that may help with your replication delays if you want to test them on top of 2.4.42. --Quanah > On Aug 15, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Brian Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We have a 2-way master production cluster actively running 2.4.39. We are > wanting to upgrade to 2.4.41 (we haven't yet internally certified 42). What > is the best practices around upgrading this cluster while keeping at least > one of the servers online? Is it replication-safe to have one node on 2.4.39 > and one on 2.4.41 for a short period? > > If not, I can temporarily comment out the syncrepl statements until both > servers are on 2.4.41 and then reenable replication after both are upgraded. > We can live with short inconsistency period between the servers during the > upgrade of the servers until we can resume replication. Also, is the DB > format fully compatible between these two versions or would it be better to > reload the DB new from an LDIF backup on 2.4.41? Is there an upgrade doc > somewhere that discusses these issues? > > Thanks. > > -- > Brian Wright > Sr. UNIX Systems Engineer > 901 Mariners Island Blvd Suite 200 > San Mateo, CA 94404 USA > Email [email protected] > Phone +1.650.539.3530 > www.marketo.com > > <Marketo.jpg> >
