Re: BDB vs FSFS - OMG!

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 9:44 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>wrote:

> hosted elsewhere for them. The BDB backend (thanks to improvements to the
> Berkeley DB library itself) is much more stable today than it was when we
> first started this project, so it's quite possible that we don't hear noise
>

That's quite surprising. My understanding from the Sleepycat/Oracle team
way back when was that our core usage of BDB was wrong and would never be
properly supported by them. Have they embraced multiple reader/writer
processes now, or do they still advocate that having a single-process is
the only Right Way(tm)? -- justin
Received on 2013-01-07 12:13:19 CET