LI Xin wrote:
Howard Chu wrote:
> Dave Horsfall wrote:
>> Can someone please provide a succint response that I can relay in
>> turn? They refuse to listen to reason.
> Two things: slapd is known to crash in various ways when using BDB 4.3
> under heavy load. Also, there was no database format change between BDB
> 4.3 and 4.4. There was a logfile format change though, so you'll want to
> have a full checkpoint and remove all the obsolete log files.
That's quite informative and thanks for the information. Because FAQ
says that 4.2 is recommended BDB release, should it be used by default?
Or is it just fine to use 4.4?
We've had the most experience with 4.2; it has pretty much worked well
for us from the beginning, plus or minus a few patches. We've done some
testing on BDB 4.4 and 4.5 and found no obvious problems, but obviously
since 4.2 has been around, stable, for a lot longer, that's what we're
most confident about.
I think 4.4 and 4.5 are probably fine. Also, for folks working on 64 bit
machines, 4.4 supports larger caches than 4.2, which may be an important
consideration. Performance-wise, each version is slightly different, but
I don't recall the differences being very significant. I don't have our
test notes in front of me at the moment...
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc
OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/