Re: back-bdb deadlocks?

["David Boreham" <david_list@boreham.org>]

> I would never be so ambitious. But as you can see, it's only 4 lines of 
> changes. The desired functionality is already present in BDB, there's 
> just no convenient user-level access to it. My patch provides that API 
> access. I've also submitted the patch to Sleepycat (bug#10619) so 
> hopefully it or something similar will be available in the near future.

I guess I was thinking about the packaging issues in requiring
a patched libdb. Also, did Keith say the change is safe ?
There might be side effects of enabling and disabling logging
within the same DB that you haven't found yet. (I'm not saying
that there _are_, just that if I were making that change I'd want
to be sure that there aren't).