Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Saturday, July 06, 2013 01:52:59 PM Howard Chu wrote:
Florian Weimer wrote:
* Howard Chu:
LMDB doesn't need dirty tricks to look good. (And at only 6KLOCs of
source, there's nowhere to hide any tricks anyway.)
Okay, I found a snag: the 511 bytes limit on the key size. Berkeley
DB's disk format does not impose a limit on key or value size (at
least for B-trees). For some applications, this will introduce new
error conditions, and working around this limitation requires
reworking the database schema.
True. There's a bit of leeway here, we can raise the key size to ~1/2 the
page size if necessary. But ultimately, we don't support keys that don't
fit in a single page and there are no plans to add such support. If we see
enough apps that can't live with this, we may revisit the situation.
I did go back and look at the plans for mdb integration in Postfix, since it's
my MTA of choice. It does seem that there are some barriers to adoption:
http://www.postfix.com/LMDB_README.html
Are there any plans to address these issues?
Yes http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/201303/msg00002.html
we've been working with Wietse Venema and plan to have this addressed in our
upcoming 0.9.7 LMDB release.
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51de90ba.2060...@symas.com
