On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 15:04 +0200, Simon Matter wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 14:44 +0200, J. Roeleveld wrote: > >> On Wednesday 22 September 2010 13:47:26 Jeffrey T Eaton wrote: > >> <snipped> > >> I am probably missing some info here, but.... > >> > And, as Bron has said, there's something wrong with the way Cyrus uses > >> BDB. > >> > I've never been able to understand BDB well enough to figure it out > >> > myself, nor have I ever found anyone who can help. For what its > >> worth, I > >> > solved the problem by not using BDB at all on the Cyrus systems I > >> used. > >> If it is possible to not use BDB, and BDB causes problems with upgrades, > >> why > >> is BDB still used then? > > BDB is wicked fast and scales well. At least that is the typical > > argument in defense of BDB. And given the stellar performance one sees > > from OpenLDAP I'm prone to believing it. > Fine, that may all be true. But I never ever heard someone going from BDB > to skiplist only and coming back because he had any performance issues. True; and we moved to Skiplist, and no BDB, a long time ago. I was just answering the question "why is BDB still used then?". It may be some degree faster, but IMO isn't worth the agony of figuring out BDB issues. > Maybe it doesn't matter so much with Cyrus and we should try to find out > what is "Poetry and Truth"? If BDB is not really required for Cyrus it > could be made optional for those who really want it. > BTW, it's even worse than Bron said. You not only get errors in the logs > even without using any BDB, you can also end up with a broken BDB > environment which prevents Cyrus from starting up :) ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://www.cyrusimap.org/ List Archives/Info: http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/
