From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 13 11:41:42 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA20D1065672 for ; Tue, 13 May 2008 11:41:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ap00@mail.ru) Received: from mx0.awanti.com (mx0.awanti.com [91.190.112.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A2D8FC17 for ; Tue, 13 May 2008 11:41:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ap00@mail.ru) Received: from pstation (unknown [10.28.4.14]) by mx0.awanti.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C53C34C194 for ; Tue, 13 May 2008 15:41:40 +0400 (MSD) Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 15:44:06 +0400 From: Anthony Pankov X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.51) Personal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <2117635718.20080513154406@mail.ru> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20080512152430.3720683e@mbook.local> References: <9FC19AC2-DAD8-418C-8B9C-F129DEC58CEF@gmail.com> <15336578.20080512123806@mail.ru> <200805121153.00809.jonathan+freebsd-hackers@hst.org.za> <1663320218.20080512223531@mail.ru> <20080512152430.3720683e@mbook.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re[2]: BDB corrupt X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Anthony Pankov List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 11:41:42 -0000 Monday, Mike Meyer May 12, 2008, 11:24:30 PM, you wrote: MM> On Mon, 12 May 2008 22:35:31 +0400 Anthony Pankov wrote: >> Because BDB: >> 1. do not need additional installation >> 2. is part of base system which mean it is mature, reliable and stable MM> BDB in the base system is mature, reliable and stable *for what it's MM> used for in the base system.* So long as your requirements are covered MM> by that usage, you'll be ok. MM> The uses I know of for BDB in the base system all consist of databases MM> of relatively small items that are changed infrequently, and usually MM> with a locking mechanism. From what you've said, this doesn't describe MM> your requirements. MM> More importantly, from what other people are saying, your requirements MM> are ones for which it's known that BDB is *not* reliable, or otherwise MM> unsuitable. In particular, an effort is underway to allow parallel MM> ports builds, which implies concurrent access to the database, which MM> is a known source of problems for BDB. MM>