BDB corrupt

[James Mansion]

Kurt J. Lidl wrote:
> This catapults back into the arena of "stuff that isn't in the
> base system".  Not to mention I'm not sure that the Oracle BDB
> license would allow bundling in the OS as a binary.  I doubt it,
> but that's a different bikeshed to paint :-)
>   
Is the LGPL of QDBM and TokyoCabinet also a problem? Could even try 
grovelling
with Mikio?  (Partially joking there. I assume he chose LGPL because he 
wants
it that way, but people have been known to change licenses for a base 
system - like
this http://blogs.sun.com/aalok/entry/lzma_on_opensolaris)

And is the objection to SQL such the sqlite is really out of the running?

Anyway, in this case, would writing an RPC server to own the data kill 
the performance?
It should be easier to write something that can save the database 
atomically and index
it in-core. It could be started on demand and shut down after a short 
inactivity, a bit
like tibco's rvd.
> There are known problems with certain keys corrupting the DB 1.8x
> series code.  In fact, the "release" of the 1.86 was an attempt
> to solve this problem when the KerberosV people at MIT found
> a repeatable key insert sequence that would corrupt things.
> (Or at least that's what I remember, it was a long time ago, and
> I might have the details wrong.)
>
>   
Have to say its a little concerning that such 'mature' code is actually 
problematic.
Particularly since I'm not aware of a non-LGPL alternative.

Do you have anything by way of a pointer?  Google didn't help me here.

James