Re: apr_dbm and concurrency

On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 4:21 AM Nick Kew <[email protected]> wrote:

> > On 9 Nov 2023, at 16:15, Greg Stein <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Personally, I'd deprecate apr_dbm entirely, and direct all clients
> towards sqlite.
>
>...

> +1 to deprecting apr_dbm, provided we explain exactly why (so users
> are clear whether or not it matters to their use cases).  The alternative
> would
> be smart locking code within apr_dbm, and I doubt that anyone wants to
> put that effort in.
>
> Applications can still use a dbm of their choice without the APR layer.
>

Or, apps can stick to an older APR. ... we don't have to carry this forward
into future versions of APR (IMO).

To your point, it is probably a single page with code samples to show how
to do K/V with sqlite, to replace the apr_dbm calls. That's gonna be way
easier than locking code integrated into apr_dbm.

Cheers,
-g