On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 02:01:49PM -0500, Michael Alan Dorman wrote: > Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > This sort of begs the question: why not use DB 3.x? Is there some new > > feature you need in DB 4? > > Anecdotaly, I believe the OpenLDAP and Cyrus projects have both found > DB4 to be more reliable under load than DB3.
To add to the anecdotes... We have been using the predecessor of Sendmail, Inc's SAMS product (ultimately derived from Cyrus, I believe) and have seen some problems with locking and sleepycat db's resulting in hanging IMAP servers or database corruption. I would not blame mod_perl first -- it's not responsible for the database. I'm not certain that the problem is in the IMAP server either -- but the environment consists of the IMAP server, POP server, tcl scripts, and web interface all trying to access a sleepycat database. Sendmail, Inc. has mentioned (I believe privately) that they feel the problems have been resolved in the newer versions of the sleepycat db. I'm not trying to put words in their mouth, so I could be mistaken, but this is afaik. Before blaming mod_perl, I would run the server with the -X option to make sure the script is only being called once within the mod_perl environment (just being paranoid). Multiple (almost) simultaneous invocations might be causing some of the locking problems. They wouldn't show up then when being run from the command line. my $0.02 --jim
