* Dave Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-21 08:26]: > Henning Brauer wrote: > > * Uv Pzaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-20 23:12]: > >> I wonder why OpenBSD packages (i.e. openldap-server-2.3.24.tgz) still > >> uses ldbm as database backend especially since the OpenLDAP folks are > >> stating that this is no good any more: > >> (http://www.openldap.org/faq/data/cache/756.htm) and not bdb or hdb. > > > > because ldbm works fine, very much opposed to the other two you mention. > > My personal experiences with ldbm were equally fine, I recommend you use it > unless you are performing frequent writes, or are in need of high performance > lookups. Once I started making regular writes, ldbm started to pack it in > rather frequently (db corruption) so I went to bdb, however bdb takes careful > tuning to get right.
now that is funny, in the, what, 5 years? of using openldap/ldbm, i have never seen database corruption. trying to use bdb, pretty much immediately. -- Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam
