[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: AW: bdb bad performance again (really need help)
--On Monday, November 10, 2003 11:55 AM -0400 Ace Suares <email@example.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
if there is so many trouble with bdb, why not use ldbm ?
I am wondering why f.i. Tony is so positive about bdb, while I see many
posts with problems, something about cache corruption, something about
needing a very large cache, and so on. What's the story ?
The problem is not BDB, the problem is that people do not understand how
BDB works, and therefore do not configure it correctly. There has been
discussion that goes around and around about whether or not that is
something OpenLDAP should document. The general agreement is no, that is
the point of Sleepycat's documentation, and it is the responsibility of the
person configuring the server to understand how all the different layers of
the application work. I certainly don't expect OpenLDAP to maintain the
doc's for BDB, ldbm, mysql, Heimdal Kerberos, MIT kerberos, OpenSSL, or
Cyrus-SASL. And those are just some of the packages that OpenLDAP can
Stanford certainly had its own issues getting BDB set up properly, but with
help from the list, Symas, and most specifically, Howard Chu, we were able
to get that resolved. However, just like with anything else, the person or
people involved with running an application/service need to have and/or
learn familiarity with what it is they are working with.
Principal Software Developer
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html