Closed #128 via ed9de1992f5e1c23e8d8dbd61325a1e0070f2c72.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/128#event-1209931565___
Rpm-maint mailing
@leo-yuriev: libmdbx replacing libdbx may well be the eventual end point.
Deploying a format change as painlessly as possible to end-users is rate
determining to RPM+LMDB* adoption.
I'll attempt a RPM+:MDBX port ifs/when there is any sign of traction in merging
an RPM+LMDB patch, and try to cle
Google Translate works just fine: time to become pluralistic even if you can't
crack a joke in Russian.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/128#issuecomment-318869365
This RFE is implemented in issue #281 and can be closed.
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/128#issuecomment-318869381___
Rpm-maint ma
@Conan-Kudo time to learn russian ;)
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/128#issuecomment-318854552___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint
@leo-yuriev Would you please translate the documentation into English? It's a
bit hard for me to understand it, as I don't know Russian. :)
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/12
@n3npq, be free to ask me for any related improvements in libmdbx.
Additionally, I am glad to boast about new major feature of libdmbx, which is
relevant to rpmdb:
- In comparison with LMDB, nowadays liblmdb provide automatic dynamic sizing
of database file, in both directions - growth and shri
@leo-yuriev: libmdbx looks very nice, but there are several issues that need to
be fixed in an rpmdb schema before attempting better back ends. See other
issues I have reported against RPM ...
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
ht
@Conan-Kudo, please take look to https://github.com/ReOpen/libmdbx/tree/devel
and https://github.com/PositiveTechnologies/libfpta
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/128#issuecom
So, in Fedora, we have a pkgconfig definition for it, which is shared by Arch
Linux and Debian, so this is a non-issue now. It also not being independently
released isn't really a big deal, either, as we do have it as a separate
package that can be used without all of OpenLDAP.
The only remaini
2017-01-26 23:43 GMT+01:00 Per Øyvind Karlsen :
> 2017-01-16 8:04 GMT+01:00 Panu Matilainen :
>
>> On 01/16/2017 02:51 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Ralf Corsepius
>>> wrote:
>>>
On 01/15/2017 04:03 PM, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
I'm not sure how t
2017-01-16 8:04 GMT+01:00 Panu Matilainen :
> On 01/16/2017 02:51 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Ralf Corsepius
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/15/2017 04:03 PM, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how true it is, but it seems to bear out with the number of
Perhaps @hyc could provide some insight into whether the situation has improved
any since the discussions that occurred in Red Hat Bugzilla.
>From my point of view, the main issues I see are the following:
* LMDB is not independently released (it's part of the OpenLDAP source tree)
* The library
On 01/16/2017 02:51 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 01/15/2017 04:03 PM, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
I'm not sure how true it is, but it seems to bear out with the number of
previously BDB users now being LMDB users.
Unless a different DB of
On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 01/15/2017 04:03 PM, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure how true it is, but it seems to bear out with the number of
>> previously BDB users now being LMDB users.
>
>
> Unless a different DB offers substantial advantages over B
LMDB as an alternative to BDB would further help with targetting less-known and
new platforms. and as far as I know, make RPM buildable and usable on midipix
for example.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
http
At https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1086784, there also was kind of
discussion about that.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/128#issuecomment-272
On 01/15/2017 04:03 PM, Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
I'm not sure how true it is, but it seems to bear out with the number of
previously BDB users now being LMDB users.
Unless a different DB offers substantial advantages over BDB to RPM,
which does not endanger or destabilize rpm, I do not see
18 matches
Mail list logo
