[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: 2.1.17 performance issues

To: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
Subject: Re: 2.1.17 performance issues
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:12:30 -0700
Cc: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <HBF.20030417rr6j@bombur.uio.no>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030416100111.02808698@127.0.0.1> <249142658.1050482856@cadabra.stanford.edu> <55802.168.91.2.45.1050436404.squirrel@mail.ivytech.edu> <20030416141441.GC5203@conectiva.com.br> <57311.168.91.2.45.1050509915.squirrel@mail.ivytech.edu> <5.2.0.9.0.20030416100111.02808698@127.0.0.1>

At 03:58 PM 4/16/2003, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>>At 09:18 AM 4/16/2003, John Madden wrote:
>>> For now, 2.0.27 on ldbm/GDBM is blazingly-fast.
>> 
>> You should find ldbm/GDBM in 2.1 even faster (as well
>> as more stable).
>
>Faster than ldbm/berkeley?

For Berkeley DB v GDBM debates, I defer to the archives.
Personally, I gave up on GDBM ages ago.

I will say that you should find LDBM/berkeleyDB in 2.1 faster
(and more stable) than LDBM/berkeleyDB in 2.0.

Kurt

References:
- Re: 2.1.17 performance issues
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: 2.1.17 performance issues
  - From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@stanford.edu>
- 2.1.17 performance issues
  - From: "John Madden" <jmadden@ivytech.edu>
- Re: 2.1.17 performance issues
  - From: Andreas <andreas@conectiva.com.br>
- Re: 2.1.17 performance issues
  - From: "John Madden" <jmadden@ivytech.edu>
- Re: 2.1.17 performance issues
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>

Prev by Date: RE: 2.1.17 performance issues
Next by Date: Strange ACL request
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread