lør, 2002-09-07 kl. 04:17 skrev Howard Chu:
> Most of the backends offer very diverse sets of features, so it's not
> meaningful to directly compare them to each other.
Thanks, Howard! Having taken so much time and trouble with this, I'm
sure you've put this into the FAQ (or Guide? No, FAQ) by now. It taught
me a lot, mainly because most laymen (like me) should be able to
understand it.
One of the things that got me over to BDB from ldbm is, that when I
started reading this list in May/June, a couple of people kept on
complaining that their ldbm database files (I was using ldbm then) were
growing and growing with no apparent reason. "Holes" was the
explanation, with the advice that BDB didn't suffer from this. Although
the ldbm data files *seemed* larger, they weren't in fact ('ls -ls'
/path/to/dabase/files' and compare from day to day). Apart from the
superior stability and backupability of BDB.
This was the point at which I'd asked the list whether there was any
advantage in changing from ldbm to BDB.
BTW, my experience is, that 2.1.3 with BDB was fast, 2.1.4 with BDB is
*much* faster.
Best,
Tony
--
Tony Earnshaw
The usefulness of RTFM is vastly overrated.
e-post: tonni@billy.demon.nl
www: http://www.billy.demon.nl
gpg public key: http://www.billy.demon.nl/tonni.armor
Telefoon: (+31) (0)172 530428
Mobiel: (+31) (0)6 51153356
GPG Fingerprint = 3924 6BF8 A755 DE1A 4AD6 FA2B F7D7 6051 3BE7 B981
3BE7B981
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dette er en digitalt signert meldingsdel