Henning Brauer wrote: > * Uv Pzaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-20 23:12]: >> I wonder why OpenBSD packages (i.e. openldap-server-2.3.24.tgz) still >> uses ldbm as database backend especially since the OpenLDAP folks are >> stating that this is no good any more: >> (http://www.openldap.org/faq/data/cache/756.htm) and not bdb or hdb. > > because ldbm works fine, very much opposed to the other two you mention.
My personal experiences with ldbm were equally fine, I recommend you use it unless you are performing frequent writes, or are in need of high performance lookups. Once I started making regular writes, ldbm started to pack it in rather frequently (db corruption) so I went to bdb, however bdb takes careful tuning to get right. There also seems to be lots of noise about ldbm support becoming deprecated in the 2.4+ releases of OpenLDAP. You should review the OpenLDAP lists to research this more if that's of concern.
