On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 5:30 AM, P.Pruett <ppru...@webengr.com> wrote: > For OpenBSD 4.4 and current the flavor "bdb" is broken on openldap > BROKEN= OpenLDAP 2.3 is incompatible with Berkeley DB 4.6 > > Most past articles have strongly suggested haveing openldap use "bdb" > as its storage method. Seeing that even the current port is not ready > to implement OpenLDAP 2.4 suggests that using openldap without bdb may > not be so terrible. > > Staying with openbsd is the choice, so we have to use a non bdb openldap > on openbsd 4.4 or current for now. Having always used the bdb flavor > because literature suggested, I wonder > what problems for performance or maitenance in production will arise > by not using flavor bdb for openldap?
What's your support strategy? That is, when something goes wrong, what's your plan for restoring stability and confidence that it'll work in the future? If your LDAP use is read-only or write-almost-never, then there isn't much to go wrong and "just restore from last week's backup" is probably a viable strategy. If your LDAP use is write-heavy, or you're planning on using replication, then IMHO you should be looking first to the OpenLDAP mailing lists for support for OpenLDAP. What you'll learn there is that they basically have no interest in back-ldbm. For example: http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-software/200810/msg00154.html I know there are people using back-ldbm successfully, but if it blows up shortly before you do a backup, what's your plan for recovering the lost changes? How confident will you be that it won't happen again the next day? The support you'll get from the OpenLDAP people will be "told you so; switch to bdb!" So, what to do? My experience is that compiling BDB and OpenLDAP yourself isn't hard, but I had to do stuff like that all the time back when I was a sysadmin and have been using BDB professionally for years, so your mileage may vary. The key thing is to figure out how you're going to support your setup. Philip Guenther
