On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 10:55:36AM -0800, Sean Hefty wrote:
> What I think I really want is a distributed relational database management
> system with an SQL interface and triggers that maintains the SA data...
> (select * from path_rec where sgid=x and dgid=y and pkey=z)
>
> But without making any assumptions about the SA, a local cache could still
> use an RDMS to store and retrieve the data records. Would requiring an
> RDMS on each system be acceptable?
We already have several databases for different things:
makedb (primarily for NSS)
updatedb (fast lookup of local files)
mandb (man pages)
rpmdb (yes, even on debian boxes)
sasldbconverter2 (for SASL - linux securty/login stuff)
*db4.3* (Berkeley v4.3 Database - used by apt-get/dpkg, Apache,
python, libns-db, postfix, etc)
In fact, looks like a debian "testing" box would be disfunctional
without Berkeley Database. Would that work?
sleepycat.org gives more examples of opensource use:
OpenLDAP, Kerberos, Subversion, Sendmail, Postfix,
SquidGuard, NetaTalk, Movable Type, SpamAssassin,
Mail Avenger, Bogofilter
hth,
grant
> If not, then writing a small, dumb
> pseudo-database as part of the sa_cache could provide a lot of flexibility.
>
> - Sean
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>
> To unsubscribe, please visit
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
