RE: BDB, endian

["Howard Chu" <hyc@highlandsun.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
> [mailto:owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Jong
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 1:57 PM

> > back-bdb currently uses custom sort functions with its
> Btree databases
> > because otherwise the integer entry IDs don't sort
> correctly on little-endian
> > (e.g. Intel) systems. The use of custom sort functions
> means it's unsafe to
> > use SleepyCat's db_dump/db_load to backup/restore databases
> on little-endian
> > machines.
> >
> > An alternative is to byteswap all of the entry IDs when
> they go to/from the
> > database. I think this may impose a slight performance
> cost, but it would
> > make the generic tools safe for use. Any thoughts on
> whether to make this
> > change?
>
> As in ldbm ?
> If we suppose that a single BDB get/put generate multiple invocations
> of the sort function, it would be even beneficial to do the
> byteswapping.

I'm testing this now. Since we no longer have to worry about the custom hash
function (with Hash databases replaced by Btree in 2.2.6) it seems this is a
good time to get rid of the custom sort functions too. Of course, this change
will require yet another full dump/reload (slapcat/slapadd) of any existing
databases on Little-Endian machines.

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support