LMDB key value backend for ldb_tdb (to be renamed ldb_key_val)

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Thu Feb 22 08:53:04 UTC 2018

On Thu, 2018-02-22 at 08:14 +0100, Andreas Schneider via samba-
technical wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 23:45:08 CET Garming Sam via samba-technical 
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> Hi Garming,
> > Any thoughts or comments would be well appreciated. There is definitely
> > more to come in this space and using LMDB allows us to effectively
> > implement a number of further improvements like indexing for >= which
> > would make replication much faster.
> when Jakub started to look into lmdb for ldb as a backend, we didn't have any 
> test to verify that the API is working the same way with tdb and lmdb. For 
> that he started to write tests for the API. The tests also revealed some bugs.
> If I look at the patchset I would expect more unit tests. The unit tests are 
> fast to run and we do that when we package ldb to verify it is working 
> correctly. Especially when we apply patches.

I totally agree, and I've got a proposed README.Coding that says much
the same.  I'll send that for comment tomorrow.

Thankfully Jakub's tests did land, as did a whole lot more around the
GUID index work, and as Garming mentioned there are a few more already
written that are not ready yet.

Is there something specific you are looking for or that I should be
looking out for when I start a review pass over this?

> And if you think some things can't be tested, the mocking support of cmocka 
> might be the solution. Let me know if you need help.


Andrew Bartlett
Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

More information about the samba-technical mailing list