[Pkg-Cyrus-imapd-Debian-devel] Re: [Pkg-cyrus-sasl2-debian-devel] Kicking off

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Sven Mueller wrote:
> >       * Which libdb should we link with? My suggestion is to keep with
> >         whatever is used with the cyrus-imapd packages.
> 
> Well, the question is valid (as HMH already pointed out) and whatever we
> choose, it should certainly be (made) the same as with the cyrus-imapd
> packages. Which could mean that we have to change the DB we are linking
> against on the cyrus-imapd side of the fence.

AFAIK the only benefit from SASL and Cyrus IMAP when they use the same libdb
is *possibly* a reduced memory footprint.   It really doesn't matter if SASL
and Cyrus IMAPd use different libdb as long as one of them is DB 4.3
(because DB 4.3 is versioned in Debian, unlike the older ones).  We can't
mix DB 4.1 and 4.2, for example.

I'd really prefer to link both Cyrus IMAPd and SASL to DB 4.2 (I trust CMU
to get the DB 4.2 API right, but 4.3 has fresh fixes in Cyrus IMAPd...), but
I am still waiting a reply from the libdb people about which one is supposed
to be more stable.  All I got was a private email asking WHY we might not
want to link to DB 4.3.

Anyone knows what runs better with OpenLDAP in a Dual Xeon in a *large*,
busy directory server?  THAT one is the most stable Berkeley DB, you can
bet.  OpenLDAP is the stress test from hell for BDB, and dual Xeons
(SMP+SMT+deep pipes) are notorious for unrooting all subtle BDB bugs.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh