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

Re: BDB vs. HDB



Thank you again for the information.  Could someone please point me to
documentation on configuring the idlcache?

Thank you,
-Matt
On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 10:43 -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> 
> --On Thursday, March 03, 2005 9:51 AM -0800 Donn Cave 
> <donn@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday, March 3, 2005, at 09:01 AM, Matthew J. Smith wrote:
> >> Given a brand new OpenLDAP 2.2.23 installation, is there any reason to
> >> continue to use BDB instead of HDB, or can I safely move everything to
> >> HDB?  Do the Berkley 4.2.52+ db_* tools support HDB?  I recall a
> >> problem
> >> with db_verify once upon a time...
> >
> > One thing to test would be performance on queries with the
> > search base different from the database suffix.  If you see
> > the problem I thought I was seeing, hdb will be an order of
> > magnitude worse in this case.  That was with an older version,
> > 2.2.17 I think, and of course the usual caveats with respect
> > to tuning parameters.
> 
> HDB relies heavily on the idlcache.  If you do not properly configure the 
> system with a large enough idlcache, you will see issues around queries.
> 
> --Quanah
> 
> 
> --
> Quanah Gibson-Mount
> Principal Software Developer
> ITSS/Shared Services
> Stanford University
> GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html
Matthew J. Smith
University of Connecticut ITS
This message sent at Thu Mar 3 15:27:32 2005
PGP Key: http://web.uconn.edu/dotmatt/matt.asc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part