BDB corrupt

[Garrett Cooper]

On May 13, 2008, at 2:06 PM, James Mansion wrote:

> 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

Most of the complaints about other DBs is licensing related, but  
SQLite's complaint was also the fact that the past stability record  
was a bit rocky.
HTH,
-Garrett