Re: back-bdb flaw

To: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
Subject: Re: back-bdb flaw
From: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:12:56 +0200
Cc: OpenLDAP Devel <openldap-devel@openldap.org>
In-reply-to: <4886519A.3090202@symas.com>
References: <488524C8.3050401@symas.com> <48858982.2090909@stroeder.com> <48864186.9010206@symas.com> <347BFFA5746BAE5D134027D8@[192.168.1.199]> <4886519A.3090202@symas.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080702 SeaMonkey/1.1.11

Howard Chu wrote:

And we've talked about dropping back-bdb in favor of back-hdb several times through the years. It seems now is the time.

If back-hdb has no disadvantages (like higher memory footprint) I'm for deprecating back-bdb. back-hdb offers more features anyway.

Ciao, Michael.

References:
- back-bdb flaw
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
- Re: back-bdb flaw
  - From: Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>
- Re: back-bdb flaw
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
- Re: back-bdb flaw
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>
- Re: back-bdb flaw
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>