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


Quoting "Luca Scamoni" <luca.scamoni@sys-net.it>:

> Turbo Fredriksson disse:
>> From this, I asume that my calculation would look like this:
>> File: /var/lib/ldap/dn2id.bdb
>>   4096  Underlying database page size.
>>   1     Number of tree internal pages.
>>   18    Number of tree leaf pages.
>>   => ((1+1)*4096) => 40960
> I would say 2*4096 = 8192 bytes

Sorry. Looking through the code of extract_dbstats.pl which output
I cut-and-pasted, the '40960' is sum of previous values...

>> Resulting in the value 73728 (73Mb). Correct values used?
> Resulting in 40960 bytes. You're mixing up Kbytes and bytes. So it's only
> 40Kbytes

I've been going back and forth betwen '4' and '4096' so many times,
I've started to mix up my own code...

Sorry about this.

Quoting Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>:

> Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
>>Considering that my id2entry.bdb file is only 491520 bytes
>>and dn2id.bdb is 86016 bytes, I find it odd that I have to
>>to use a HUMONGOUSLY bigger cache than [whoever wrote FAQ
>>entry #1075]... Or did I missread '73728'?
> You misread. And yes, I wrote the text of that FAQ article. Since I
> also wrote the code in back-bdb that is being described, you can be
> sure the description was accurate at the time of writing.


----- s n i p -----
For all of the people out there writing their own personal pages with
tips/notes/whatever - PLEASE consider submitting them as documents for
the OpenLDAP site to publish first/instead. Then there is at least
some possibility that the content can be checked for correctness, and
also some possibility that the content will be maintained and kept up
to date.
----- s n i p -----

I especially like the last part of the last sentence...

I continue to think that the OpenLDAP documentation sucks...

> I'm not sure why you have such difficulty comprehending the docs, but
> the BDB documentation has always seemed perfectly clear to me. Maybe
> you're just not comfortable with technical jargon in English, and
> would have an easier time with docs written in your native language. I
> know the OpenLDAP project is always happy to accept help in
> translating our docs; SleepyCat would probably welcome such assistance
> as well.

I'm PERFECTLY comfortable in reading technical English. I usually read
that better than my native language (not an exaggeration!).

As long as the documentation is CORRECT, I have no problem with it. You
think it's 'perfectly clear' because you know the inner workings of
the software's you're coding for.. I couldn't care less! I'm a user/admin,
I have no need/will to know how it works behind the scene with structures
back and forth, if they're int's, float's or what not.

I need a working calculation example. Using '4KB' as number and/or not
explaining (CLEARLY!) where the number come from (with command line
examples etc) will just look like magic, and will only complicate things
for 'everyone'.

All mails asking the same question over and over again PROVES this! EVERYONE
seem to have problems in getting KerberosV+CyrusSASL+OpenLDAP working,
so the 'rubbish' (sorry, I think it is) that the OpenLDAP documentation
is sufficient/good/whatever don't hold truth...

NO ONE have 'complained' about _MY_ documentation/book (more
than the obvious spellingerrors etc :). It have helped EVERYONE
trying to get it working. It is written in _HUMAN_ english, not
_TECHNICAL_ english.

Someone said that 'never let a technician write documentation'..
I couldn't agree more!

Btw, http://sapiens.wustl.edu/~sysmain/info/openldap/openldap_configure_bdb.html
isn't much better. I agree with you (in the msg00129 above) that

And anyone who blindly follows such unqualified advice is an idiot.

My intention is to rectify this, but I must understand the subject
myself, before I can give ANY advice etc and I hope you can (continue)
to help out here... My fault above (kbytes versus bytes), but I
would like to defend myself (very vaguely :) that all those numbers
just made my head spin :)