Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 00:25:16 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> To: James Mansion <james@mansionfamily.plus.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@freebsd.org>, Anthony Pankov <ap00@mail.ru> Subject: Re: BDB corrupt Message-ID: <D10ACB9D-8D1D-4696-BF7E-DBB0E9D74262@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <482A02CD.7040308@mansionfamily.plus.com> References: <op.uavxx8ip2n4ijf@duckjen.nextgentel.no> <9FC19AC2-DAD8-418C-8B9C-F129DEC58CEF@gmail.com> <15336578.20080512123806@mail.ru> <200805121153.00809.jonathan%2Bfreebsd-hackers@hst.org.za> <1663320218.20080512223531@mail.ru> <20080512152430.3720683e@mbook.local> <2117635718.20080513154406@mail.ru> <20080513121452.GA70860@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <20080513154137.GA28842@pix.net> <482A02CD.7040308@mansionfamily.plus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 13, 2008, at 2:06 PM, James Mansion wrote: > Kurt J. Lidl wrote: >> This catapults back into the arena of "stuff that isn't in the >> base system". Not to mention I'm not sure that the Oracle BDB >> license would allow bundling in the OS as a binary. I doubt it, >> but that's a different bikeshed to paint :-) >> > Is the LGPL of QDBM and TokyoCabinet also a problem? Could even try > grovelling > with Mikio? (Partially joking there. I assume he chose LGPL because > he wants > it that way, but people have been known to change licenses for a > base system - like > this http://blogs.sun.com/aalok/entry/lzma_on_opensolaris) > > And is the objection to SQL such the sqlite is really out of the > running? > > Anyway, in this case, would writing an RPC server to own the data > kill the performance? > It should be easier to write something that can save the database > atomically and index > it in-core. It could be started on demand and shut down after a > short inactivity, a bit > like tibco's rvd. >> There are known problems with certain keys corrupting the DB 1.8x >> series code. In fact, the "release" of the 1.86 was an attempt >> to solve this problem when the KerberosV people at MIT found >> a repeatable key insert sequence that would corrupt things. >> (Or at least that's what I remember, it was a long time ago, and >> I might have the details wrong.) >> >> > Have to say its a little concerning that such 'mature' code is > actually problematic. > Particularly since I'm not aware of a non-LGPL alternative. > > Do you have anything by way of a pointer? Google didn't help me here. > > James Most of the complaints about other DBs is licensing related, but SQLite's complaint was also the fact that the past stability record was a bit rocky. HTH, -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D10ACB9D-8D1D-4696-BF7E-DBB0E9D74262>