On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 05:14:10PM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > --On Thursday, May 31, 2007 5:08 PM -0700 Steve Langasek > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 10:12:48AM -0400, Roberto C. S??nchez wrote: > >> On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 08:29:21PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> > openldap2.3 is still building against db4.2 at upstream's specific > >> > recommendation. According to upstream, db4.5 (and db4.4) have > >> > regressions from db4.2 in supporting OpenLDAP. > > > >> > They have hopes for db4.6, once it's finally released. > > > >> > This doesn't necessarily mean that we shouldn't switch to db4.5 anyway, > >> > depending on the severity of the regressions, but I wanted to note in > >> > the bug log that there was a reason why this hadn't been done other > >> > than simple lack of time. > > > >> This is something that we on the cyrus-sasl2 team are also dealing with. > >> I think that what has held us back so far from going out on a limb is > >> the integral nature of cyrus-sasl2 for most systems. > > > > FWIW, while I would say cyrus-sasl2 is fairly integral, the bdb support > > /within/ cyrus-sasl2 is not as integral. I don't use any of the sasl > > methods on my systems that look up to a local db. > > > > Anyway, if there are problems, better that they be detected at the > > beginning of the release cycle when it's easier to get any upstream bdb > > problems fixed in time for lenny. > > My hope is 4.6 will be out long before lenny. It is the first release > since BDB 4.2 that I've seen actually outperform 4.2 across the board. 4.4 > & 4.5 were both noticeably slower in read & write tests.
4.6.18 is now available. Would be nice to know if it seems like a worthy replacement for 4.2. -- albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
