Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 02:00:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> To: bostic@sleepycat.com Cc: current@FreeBSD.org, msmith@FreeBSD.org, wes@softweyr.com Subject: Re: picking a DB (Re: nvi maintainer?) Message-ID: <200107100600.f6A60bD80812@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <200107100143.f6A1hCY28552@abyssinian.sleepycat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Technically gdbm is fine. I doubt you'll be able to displace Berkeley > DB, though; gdbm is less buggy, but doesn't offer many of the > features, nor does it offer equivalent performance. > >> I'd welcome your comments in particular, since you are an expert in >> the field and there is not going to be a conflict of interest. > > Actually, I'm pretty biased. :-) I'd like to see Berkeley DB 1.85 go > away for a lot of reasons -- I don't much care what it's replaced > with. Well, can you recommend some other alternative? You mentioned db-tests you created, etc. Did you evaluate any other dbm libraries useable for us from the licensing perspective? > Nvi won't require upgrading the library's dbm support. Berkeley DB 3.X > supports inclusion of multiple DB versions in a single application. > Nvi's simple solution is to include a copy of DB in the nvi > distribution. Well, may be that's how the nvi application will be distributed, but I doubt, that's how the nvi part of the FreeBSD will be built... In all probability, the new nvi will just get hacked to work with dbm-1.85 or gdbm. Although it is possible, that the relevant parts of DB3 will be linked staticly into it (kind of like DB3 Lite), it would be rather ugly :( Thanks, -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200107100600.f6A60bD80812>