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

Re: back-bdb IDL limitations

Is it so because of the recovery overhead can be huge ? Even so, transactions seem to be indispensable to situations like incremental slapadd.
- Jong-Hyuk

Jong Hyuk Choi
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center - Enterprise Linux Group
P. O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
email: jongchoi@us.ibm.com
(phone) 914-945-3979    (fax) 914-945-4425   TL: 862-3979

"David Boreham" <david_list@boreham.org>
Sent by: owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org

03/04/2005 12:06 PM

        To:        <openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org>
        Subject:        Re: back-bdb IDL limitations

2) there should be non-zero need for transaction protected operations of slap tools to cope with a system failure during a lengthy directory population.
I think you will find that it's almost always faster to simply disable transactions and
re-start the slapadd in the event of a failure.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature