Browse thread
[1/2 OT] Indexing (and mergeable Index-algorithms)
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2005-11-18 (16:03) |
From: | Thomas Fischbacher <Thomas.Fischbacher@P...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] [1/2 OT] Indexing (and mergeable Index-algorithms) |
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> No, it isn't. Berkeley DB offers much richer functionality, including > >> transactions and replication. > > > > However, crashes at unfortunate moments may lead to database > > corruption, > > All my crashes could be traced back to operator error and faulty > hardware. Berkeley DB has a very bad reputation when it comes to data > integrity and durability, but in my experience, this is simply not > true. I experienced data loss in the past - twice in eight years of running it under considerable load. Both times, we had good recent backups, so this was not a big issue. > > plus the license is a bit strange. > > It's a very simple, GPL-compatible copyleft license. Pretty standard. Hm, I just had a look and you are right. I thought I'd once read something about it being free only for single-server installations or non-commercial use, but I can't find that in the Debian package's copyright. Strange. -- regards, tf@cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (o_ Thomas Fischbacher - http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~tf //\ (lambda (n) ((lambda (p q r) (p p q r)) (lambda (g x y) V_/_ (if (= x 0) y (g g (- x 1) (* x y)))) n 1)) (Debian GNU)