How much of the patchet for bdb4.2 has been implemented/bypassed by bdb4.3? I would like to get a lab going with openldap2.3/bdb4.3 if the necessary parts of the 4.2 patchset were taking upstream by sleepycat.
On 6/23/05, Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Aaron Richton wrote: > > > 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!" > > Thanks for writing that. I've made some updates. Not completely happy > with the focus on "Degree 2 isolation," as that's actually an > independent issue. Really the point is that BDB 4.2 has a bug in its > transaction initialization sequence that is fixed in 4.3, and the patch > we provide for 4.2 is a hack to bypass the bug in one specific use case. > The patch is by no means a general-purpose fix, and it does not provide > Degree 2 isolation for BDB 4.2, and OpenLDAP does not invoke BDB 4.3's > Degree 2 isolation support. I'm not sure the details are important > enough to spell out in the FAQ, but still thinking about it. > > -- > -- Howard Chu > Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun > http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc > Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support >
