[pfx] expected behavior of 3.11 *with* bdb and hash/btree support?

Hi,

I'm upgrading from 3.4 to 3.11 (on debian testing).

I'd assumed since it is built with bdb and 'postconf -m' lists hash
and btree that everything would just work with my existing postfix
configs, given your strong belief in maintaining backwards
compatibility and this being the current release (not
beta/pre-release).

However, it didn't work at all, and having now read
NON_BERKELEYDB_README, it seems that is intentional, as
non_bdb_migration_level defaults to disable.

Further, it seems there is not even the option to use hash/btree when
postfix is compiled with bdb in this release.

It is easy enough for me to migrate, and I will do so now, but I
really question this incompatible upgrade path, and forcing the
migration now (unless bdb does not exist).

OTOH the README does state:

| By the way, you don't have to wait until Berkeley DB support is
| removed; your can proactively use the steps described here on a system
| that still has Berkeley DB, to migrate a Postfix configuration from
| Berkeley DB to lmdb: (or a combination of cdb: and lmdb:). 

indicating that one should be able to continue using hash/btree while
bdb still exists, so maybe I'm missing something?

I went and looked at the recent threads regarding this new migration
logic, and see that the Debian maintainer, Michael Tokarev, did write
in the thread 'Attention to maintainers: postfix-3.11.0-RC4' back on
March 2nd, regarding non_bdb_migration_level:

> I think I missed one more state: warn.
>
> The idea is to have it enabled by default while bdb support is
> still here, - so that a warning is issued when hash/btree is in
> use, but it is used still?

thank you,
Greg
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]