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

Re: [Fwd: Re: LDBM or BDB ?]

Thanks Tony,

I just posted a message to Frank Swasey and the list server about
switching to BDB from LDBM. If you agree, or have some suggestions on
how to switch 4 OpenLDAP servers to BDB, feel free to respond to this.

I believe I've heard something in the past about problems with LDBM but
never thought it was worth switching. It sounds like the opposite is
true and I should consider switching to BDB.

On Fri, 2004-04-02 at 07:15, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> fre, 02.04.2004 kl. 12.14 skrev Kent L. Nasveschuk:
> > Kent L. Nasveschuk wrote:
> > 
> > > Can anyone give me some reasons to switch from ldbm to Berkeley bdb for
> > > LDAP backend? I had such problems getting LDAP to compile with BDB that
> > > I gave up on it until recently. Now I don't know if it is worth the
> > > effort to recompile all databases to BDB or leave as is. I have roughly
> > > 2000 accounts 3 slave LDAP directories and 1 master. These are used
> > > primarily for Samba authentication.
> > 
> > I recommend you stay a while with ldbm; samba wrotes very few in the 
> > ldap, so the ldbm may be OK (we have about +29.000 accounts and runs as 
> > a charm).
> > The DBD requires a careful tunning, and may be a pain if you don't have 
> > some experience (look the list :).
> Kent,
> I'd suggest you read Sleepycat's own comments on this - alas bundled
> with the BDB source. I went over to BDB soon after beginning with
> Openldap (2.1.8 IIRC) around 2 years ago, after others on the list
> answered exactly the same question from me :) The answer was, don't use
> ldbm if you do regular writes, as it grows sparser and sparser ("full of
> holes") and there's no way of repairing that.
> Suffice it to say that RedHat with RHEL3 has itself abruptly left ldbm
> for BDB (even though RH has kept to Openldap 2.0.27), and that many
> notables on this list also advise BDB. Yes, you need to spend extra time
> on the Sleepycat docs, yes it costs more time and trouble to configure
> it (DB_CONFIG) but you get much back in the form of dependability and
> reliability. Lastly, BDB is now the DB implementation that Openldap
> developers use as standard and is the only one being developed by
> Sleepycat.
> Best,
> --Tonni
Kent L. Nasveschuk <kent@wareham.k12.ma.us>