Re: resubmit your dbm/gdbm-based DLR storage patch and vote to phase out internal DLR storage in favor of DBM DLR storage

"> I'm really -1 for dropping internal dlr storage. bdb or gdbm may be
overkill
> for small setups and forces external dependency (with is the goal why we
> support mysql/pgsql/oracle). user should decide which one to use w/o
> forcing them to install yet another database just to be able to use dlr's.
"
surely we have it configurable as to which storage mechanism we use, we are
not
forced to install yet another db if we don't want.  and theres no need
to drop one thats there. So as default, keeping the internal mem one is ok.
As for external dependency, dbm or gdbm has a dependency
on a library, so do the other that are already there oracle,mysql etc,
so the truth! what is the problem?