Re: back-bdb flaw

Howard Chu writes:

Considering that back-hdb and back-bdb share 90% of their code, I don't see any immediate impact from this decision. Even going thru and deleting/moving the files in CVS is more trouble than it's worth.

If so, the version (RE25?) which removes back-bdb can rename the "hdb" backend to "bdb", maybe leaving "hdb" as an alias to be removed later. They are similar enough that this should not cause confusion. slapcat - slapadd will be required to upgrade, but that's required anyway between release branches.

What advantages do bdb still have over hdb today? Only that it's more used and thus somewhat better tested?