On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 04:15:16PM -0500, Skip Montanaro wrote: > > BAW> I still think we may want to pull PyBSDDB into the standard distro, > BAW> as a way to provide BDB api's > 1.85. The question is, what would > BAW> this new module be called? I dislike "bsddb3" -- which I think > BAW> PyBSDDB itself uses -- because it links against BDB 4.0. > > Guido> Good idea. Maybe call it berkeleydb? That's what Sleepycat > Guido> calls it (there's no connection with the BSD Unix distribution > Guido> AFAICT). > > Why can't it just be called bsddb? As far as I could tell tell, it provides > a bsddb-compatible interface at the module level. The only change at the > bsddb level is the addition of an extra object (db? I can't recall right > now and have to get offline soon for the credit card machine so I can't > pause to check ;-) which gives the programmer access to all the PyBSDDB > magic. > > Skip Modern berkeleydb uses much different on disk database formats, glancing at the docs on sleepycat.com i don't even think it can read bsddb (1.85) files. Existing code using bsddb (1.85) should not automatically start using a different database library even if we provide a compatibility interface. That upgrade can be done to code manually using: import berkeleydb bsddb = berkeleydb (and creating a single bsddb module that used the old 1.85 library for the old interface and the 3.3/4.0 library for the modern interface would add bloat to many applications that don't need both if it were even possible to link that in such a way as to avoid the symbol conflicts) Greg -- Some mistakes are too much fun to make only once.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4