Re: back-bdb deadlocks

[Lawrence Greenfield <leg+@andrew.cmu.edu>]

   From: "Howard Chu" <hyc@highlandsun.com>
   Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 16:40:15 -0800

   I believe a similar solution to this is needed in back-bdb, but I
   haven't yet spent much time thinking about it can work. The current
   situation is that back-bdb gets deadlocked very easily by more than
   2 simultaneous updaters.  There doesn't seem to be any easy
   solution to this; my debug session with three deadlocked threads
   showed that two of them were deadlocked in txn_abort - i.e.,
   deadlock detection already did it's job, but new locks were still
   needed to unravel the transaction. Pretty rude. (I suspect this

If this is happening and OpenLDAP is playing by Berkeley db's rules,
there is a bug in Berkeley db and it should be reported to Sleepycat.
I've never seen something like that happen in my testing, though I
very rarely play with multithreaded programs.

Larry