reoccuring DBERRORs

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Igor Brezac wrote:
> >It is *much* more stable than 4.x. if you're using DB3 from a distro (e.g.
> >Debian's).  But it is slower, though.
> 
> The stability of DB3 over DB4 is arguable.  OpenLDAP folks will disagree 
> with you.  Also my experience is with Solaris in this regard.

Well better explain, I do mean DB 3.2.9, as patched by Debian (3.2.9-23). I
did say "from a distro", but I guess I should have said "responsible,
well-networked Linux distros" (the top Linux distributions share patches
between themselves quite often).

And I do mean stability in a Cyrus context.  Cyrus' needs for DB are far
simpler than those of OpenLDAP... or at least they used to be.

Still, considering the ammount of crap OpenLDAP went through with DB 4.x,
especially early DB 4.2, from SMT boxes corrupting databases to hangs and
busy-loops, I am actually surprised they consider DB4 better than DB3.
Maybe it is my Debian-centric view which is confusing things, I have no idea
if DB3 is in good state on the outside world, especially if it is in the
distant continents of Solaris, AIX, etc ;-)

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh