> OpenLDAP 2.3 requires that you use the transactions patch to BDB 4.2.52
Strictly speaking, this isn't true. It's greatly beneficial to run with Degree 2 isolation, but if sites believe they have a compelling reason to not use unofficial patches, they don't have to. It's probably not in their best interest, but who are we to judge? (Until they start asking openldap-software why their disks fill...) I have a feeling that the Degree 2 isolation patch is going to become a FAQ as 2.3 gets adopted. I've tried to summarize under "Which version of BerkeleyDB should I use?" in the FAQ-O-Matic; revisions encouraged. Hopefully this will eventually get to be a Google hit for "BerkeleyDB 4.2.52 library needs TXN patch!" Note that I explicitly left out discussion of 4.2 vs. 4.3; I consider that separate from the Degree 2 patch issue. However, I present some recent thoughts on the issue. Quanah said: > As for BDB 4.3, I would still say use it at your own risk. :) Howard Chu said: > 4.3.27 has proven to be too unstable for use. The jury is still out on > 4.3.28. I've reverted to using BDB 4.2. and I say: 4.2.52, plus all official patches, plus the unofficial Degree 2 patch, proved itself stable with 2.2 and works with 2.3. I'd be interested to hear feedback results with 4.3.28, but will personally focus on a OpenLDAP 2.3+patched Berkeley DB 4.2 combination for now.
