openldap-commit2devel(a)OpenLDAP.org wrote: I've now got rudimentary slapadd/slapcat support built around MDB. This is just with dn2id and id2entry, no attribute indexing supported yet. Comparing to back-hdb on ada. Loading a 250K entry database, 147MB LDIF file MDB time to slapadd was real 0m34.345s user 0m25.366s sys 0m2.492s BDB time to slapadd was real 0m42.284s user 0m35.646s sys 0m2.424s MDB uses significantly less CPU time and is significantly faster overall. The resulting MDB database was around 561MB. The resulting BDB database was around 436MB, with another ~460MB or so occupied on disk by the BDB cache files. Repeating the same test using a 1M entry database, 589MB LDIF file MDB time to slapadd was real 2m8.615s user 1m42.074s sys 0m5.504s BDB time to slapadd was real 2m49.811s user 2m41.874s sys 0m8.969s The MDB database size was 2.2GB. The BDB database size was about 1.7GB plus again as much for its BDB cache so total 3.5GB on disk. All of these tests were run with slapadd -q, so BDB was only doing database writes, no transaction logging. With fully synchronous writes, MDB is about twice as slow as BDB. I'm not sure there's much we can do about this, since generally any MDB write dirties more pages than a single BDB write. At the moment back-mdb is functionally identical to back-hdb - all of the dn2id layout is the same, etc. so this is a pretty apples-to-apples comparison. The mdb library itself is now pretty much complete; at least I believe it supports everything that back-mdb needs. I'll be porting the rest of the back-mdb code over now. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/