389-ds-base

#50547 Enable BDB MVCC mode (DB_MULTIVERSION)
Closed: wontfix by spichugi. Opened by firstyear.

Closed: wontfix
Reopen Issue

Issue Description

According to the official BDB documentation a flag called DB_MULTIVERSION exists which enables copy-on-write (aka multiversion concurrency control) in the DB. This is the same strategy that is used by LMDB to achieve high performance operation with large numbers of concurrent reads.

We should consider enabling this flag in the project, and attempting to understand if we have locking strategies in place that may interfer with this process (IE rwlocks).

+1, but we need performance tests first.

Metadata Update from @mhonek:
- Custom field origin adjusted to None
- Custom field reviewstatus adjusted to None
- Issue tagged with: Performance

I actually already have a patch, and I'm doing load tests but it's uncovered a segfault in libdb so I have to struggle with debuginfo now :) perhaps not as easy to enable as I had hoped.

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50552

I confirm Matus' request: we need performance data first. And in your PR you state: "However, we still have poor concurrency and locking strategies all over the code base, so many of the benefits of this may not be visible until other changes are made".

I don't see any benefit of introducing a change like this without having done the investigation of the mentioned problems in the server first and demonstrating a real impact on performance.

Also many people are on vacation right now, please don't push and give them a chance to review

I confirm Matus' request: we need performance data first. And in your PR you state: "However, we still have poor concurrency and locking strategies all over the code base, so many of the benefits of this may not be visible until other changes are made".

I'm doing performance tests and in the process found a segfault in libdb which I'm investigating. I always planned to provided proper numbers with this change.

I don't see any benefit of introducing a change like this without having done the investigation of the mentioned problems in the server first and demonstrating a real impact on performance.

Silly William thought it would be a quick change, but apparently a crash in libdb was awaiting me. I'm getting to a point where I may discontinue the investigation because of it as my time may be better elsewhere.

Also many people are on vacation right now, please don't push and give them a chance to review

I ... why ... ? I'm not sure I follow - I would never push code like this unless it has been reviewed by the team and accepted by them? Good to know people are on vacation - there certainly is no rush for this code at all.

Metadata Update from @mreynolds:
- Issue set to the milestone: 1.4 backlog

389-ds-base is moving from Pagure to Github. This means that new issues and pull requests
will be accepted only in 389-ds-base's github repository.

This issue has been cloned to Github and is available here:
- https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/issues/3603

If you want to receive further updates on the issue, please navigate to the github issue
and click on subscribe button.

Thank you for understanding. We apologize for all inconvenience.

Metadata Update from @spichugi:
- Issue close_status updated to: wontfix
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Metadata
None

Performance

None
None
None
None
None
Static archive. pagure.io was sunset in 2026; this is a read-only snapshot.
Red Hat Logo

Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat. Learn more about the relationship between Red Hat and Fedora »

© Red Hat, Inc. and others.