[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: ldbm database usage

To: gomez@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
Subject: Re: ldbm database usage
From: dboreham@netscape.com (David Boreham)
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:48:15 -0700
Cc: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>, "'openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org'" <openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org>
References: <C739248D6A6FD211B1940008C7A4752CC0C0CF@D072038> <3740B016.9EFE7795@netscape.com> <3740BB2A.DADA6231@engr.sgi.com> <3.0.5.32.19990518201253.0097d820@localhost> <3741B2F6.D57B09BC@netscape.com> <3741B2F2.9AD5426B@engr.sgi.com>

Juan Carlos Gomez wrote:

>  Will version 5 still be hardwired to Berkley DB or has this
> changed? I think having flexible backend is nicety....
> and it may allow for better performance in some platforms...
> (SGI :-)

The only version of the server which was hardwired
to BerkeleyDB was 1.x.
Versions 3, 4 and 5 all support pluggable back-ends,
allowing different database technology to be used.
Of course practically nobody has actually written and
deployed a backend other than the default "ldbm"/BDB one.

References:
- ldbm database usage
  - From: "MCGARRAHAN, KENNETH L (SWBT)" <km4155@momail.sbc.com>
- Re: ldbm database usage
  - From: dboreham@netscape.com (David Boreham)
- Re: ldbm database usage
  - From: Juan Carlos Gomez <gomez@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>
- Re: ldbm database usage
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: ldbm database usage
  - From: dboreham@netscape.com (David Boreham)
- Re: ldbm database usage
  - From: Juan Carlos Gomez <gomez@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>

Prev by Date: Re: ldbm database usage
Next by Date: Re: [ldap] Re: LDAP SDK API question.
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread