On Sun, Aug 25, 2002 at 01:10:26PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote: > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Greg Stein wrote: > > > The reason why I suggest GDBM over SDBM is that the latter has a pretty > > serious limitation on key and value sizes. > > I thought we were using RSE's modified version of SDBM that had increased > limits for the keys/values which was needed for mod_ssl. No?
Nope. I had adjusted my SDBM constants (in mod_dav) to match RSE's. That was the version that was initially imported into the Apache tree. However, the SDBM that is included into Perl used the "original" constants, so wrowe changed the sizes back so that Perl could directly manipulate the SDBM databases. Of course, what is even worse is that SDBM databases won't tell you what size was *compiled* into the code and used for the database. IMO, we should remain compatible with Perl's SDBM. But I think that SDBM should always remain what it is: a fallback. And there are definitely caveats when using the thing. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
