Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> Manuzhai wrote:
> >> What makes me angry about this is the same thing that made me angry
> >> the last time I tripped over a rather similar database-recovery botch.
> >
> > Well, if you want to prevent it from happening another time, you
> > might just want to hop onto the fsfs bandwagon. It's become the
> > default for 1.2, and for a reason - seems much more stable, no more
> > db-recovery.
>
> Hm, or the 1.3.(1?) bandwagon with bdb-4.4 -- no more db-recovery
> there, either. :)
Speaking of which... where do we stand with 1.3.1 and BDB, Brane? Is
the r18144-etc entry in STATUS ready for review and voting, or are any
other changes still coming in?
For what it's worth, I got a call from Keith Bostic the other day
(which I don't think he'd mind my reporting about in a public forum),
basically saying that the acquisition by Oracle does not change
anything -- Sleepycat remains available to help in any way they can
with the SVN integration of BDB 4.4. It didn't sound like you were
stuck on anything that needed consultation with Sleepycat, but I
thought I'd mention it just in case.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Feb 27 22:16:00 2006