Re: modrdn err=71 question

[Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@stanford.edu>]

--On Wednesday, November 16, 2005 1:49 PM -0500 matthew sporleder 
<msporleder@gmail.com> wrote:

> > back-hdb does, and at least in 2.3.11 or later, is as robust as back-bdb.
> >
> > I personally would avoid using back-ldbm if at all possible for numerous
> > reasons. ;)  And hopefully it'll be removed when 2.4 comes out.
>
>
> I would make a care for ldbm as it doesn't seem to create as much i/o
> load as back-bdb.  This is helpful with a large database.

At a guess, you likely didn't configure back-bdb properly if this is what 
you are seeing.  There are a number of excellent reasons not to use ldbm 
(like no data integrity checking, so your database can happily go corrupt 
without you knowing) and its code is not being maintained past making sure 
it continues to barebones work in a given release.  All new features, 
development, etc, are focused on the other OpenLDAP backends.

--Quanah


--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Developer
ITSS/Shared Services
Stanford University
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html