So my first question: Does mdb have limitations like bdb it have aka BDB_IDL_LOGN?
Yes. back-mdb is ~60% the same code as back-bdb/hdb, its indexing functions are basically identical.
However, I never got mdb to work successfully by modifying these values.
Does this mean, it's not possible at moment to get running the mdb with BDB_IDL_LOGN = 2^17?
@Howard: I'm sorry, it was really not my intention to annoy, because of my statement about this problem in the bdb/mdb. Yes and I've read/followed each document under http://symas.com/mdb/, but not every one is a developer and not all of them is easy to understand. I try to get deeper inside to openldap and understand how it works, but it is really hard ;-)
But anyway, I have to say thanks to all the great work you and the developer have done on openldap and especially mdb too!
Thanks Meike
--On Friday, January 18, 2013 6:16 PM +0100 Meike Stone meike.stone@googlemail.com wrote:
So my first question: Does mdb have limitations like bdb it have aka BDB_IDL_LOGN?
Yes. back-mdb is ~60% the same code as back-bdb/hdb, its indexing functions are basically identical.
However, I never got mdb to work successfully by modifying these values.
Does this mean, it's not possible at moment to get running the mdb with BDB_IDL_LOGN = 2^17?
I can guarantee that would never work, as the variable with MDB is MDB_IDL_LOGN. I don't recall exactly the issues I hit when changing it to 17 from 16. Also, MDB has changed substantially since I did that testing. ;) I was ok with not modifying it given the read speed improvements in mdb vs bdb.
--Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. -------------------- Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
openldap-technical@openldap.org
-
Meike Stone -
Quanah Gibson-Mount