Re: HAVE_BERKELEY_DB_THREAD (ITS#1176)

[Kurt@OpenLDAP.org]

At 08:48 AM 5/28/01, bostic@sleepycat.com wrote:
>Since OpenLdap doesn't support transactions yet, my guess is
>that it shouldn't be permitting multiple threads of control to
>access the database, as long as there's at least one writer
>thread.  Under high levels of concurrency, when deadlock can
>occur, the database may become corrupted.

Can DB deadlock occur when no DB write cursors are used?

>To enhance performance while still implementing this restriction
>in OpenLdap, OpenLdap could use Berkeley DB's Concurrent Data
>Store code base.  The Berkeley DB Concurrent Data Store product
>adds multiple-reader, single writer capabilities to the Berkeley
>DB Data Store product, supporting applications that need
>concurrent updates and do not want to implement their own
>locking protocols.  (Berkeley DB Concurrent Data Store is
>intended for applications that require occasional write access
>to a database that is largely used for reading.)

This may be appropriate as it appears to be the interface
most consistent with LDBM's design.

Kurt