Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 15:46:07 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> To: Anthony Pankov <ap00@mail.ru> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de> Subject: Re: BDB corrupt Message-ID: <E394497D-2EB7-422F-92EC-6A178FBEC381@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <15336578.20080512123806@mail.ru> References: <op.uavxx8ip2n4ijf@duckjen.nextgentel.no> <20080509124308.GA596@britannica.bec.de> <9FC19AC2-DAD8-418C-8B9C-F129DEC58CEF@gmail.com> <15336578.20080512123806@mail.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 12, 2008, at 1:38 AM, Anthony Pankov wrote: > > Please, can anybody explain what is the problem with BDB (1.86). > > Is there known caveats of using BDB? Is there some rules which > guarantee from curruption or it is fully undesirable to use BDB under > high load? > > It is important for me because of using BDB in my project. > > >> On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 01:52:46PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: >>> >>> As one of the persons hacking on pkg_install in pkgsrc/NetBSD, I >>> would >>> *strongly* advisy you against storing the files only in a bdb file. >>> The change of major and complete corruption with bdb185 is high, >>> consider pulling the plug in the middle of a long update. > >> Sunday, May 11, 2008, 5:38:25 PM, you wrote: > > GC> +1. BDB is quite easy to corrupt... BDB isn't ATOMic, like SQL or other DB backends. -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E394497D-2EB7-422F-92EC-6A178FBEC381>