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

Re: HDB Production Usage

--On Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:33 AM +0800 Mark Mcdonald <mmcdonald@staff.iinet.net.au> wrote:

-- From: Re: OpenLdap DB size difference after slapcat and slapadd. --
I'd note that LDBM is not recommended for use, and if you are in the
process of upgrading (hopefully to 2.3.24), then you should really
updating your database backend to BDB or HDB.  I've not seen database
fragmentation be an issue with those backends, either.

We are currently in the process of planning a similar upgrade from the
oh-so-evil LDBM at the moment, and I have recommended using BDB as a
backend.  I did look into HDB, and while it looks better than BDB on all
fronts [1], I did not recommend it's usage simply on the basis that it's
considered 'experimental' [2].

My question to the list is: What are you experiences with HDB?  Is it
still experimental?  Has anyone used it for an extended period of time in
a production environment?  Is there a roadmap anywhere outlining when
it's expected to be stable?

Stanford has been using HDB in its production servers for several months. We pushed it through our dev & test environments for some time before making the decision to move it into production. It has held up well.


Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Developer
ITS/Shared Application Services
Stanford University
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html