tdb performance

[Michael Still]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Michael Still wrote:

Hey all, I think the original point of my question about this got lost in
the licensing debate...

> I have been using it for one of my own open source projects (in the next
> release), and have a few questions...
>
>  - is it ok for me to release tdb in my own codebase as a convenience
>    library (libtdb?)? Are there any plans to do this for Samba anyway
>    which I might conflict with?

This is not a license question -- my code is GPL. It is common politeness.
Does anyone object to me distributing a snapshot of tdb in my own code? Do
they object if I install this as libtdb? Does samba have any plans for
this as a separate library that I might conflict with?

>  - I have developed some basic docbook SGML man pages for the tdb calls
>    I feel I understand well enough, would you like a copy of them?
>
> And finally, the big ugly question...

The offer of the docbook sgml for man pages on the tdb calls (most of
them) is still open.

> tdb is not as fast as I would like it to be. I was wondering if anyone had
> considered caching for the recently accessed keys in the database (perhaps
> the size of the cache being configurable on open)? My hope is that perhaps
> someone who understands the code a bit better can explain to me why it is
> a grossly terrrible idea before I go ahead and try to implement it.

The only comment that I have had here is that the caching would need to be
able to deal with multiple readers / writers. Does anyone have a feel
about any other issues I should be aware of?

Thanks,
Mikal

-- 

Michael Still (mikal at stillhq.com)