LSARC/2007/299 Berkeley_Database_4.5.20 - fast track restarted

[Alan Coopersmith]

>    Due to a number of customers running legacy systems on BDB 4.2 and not 
>    willing to upgrade to BDB 4.5, we need to deliver both versions. 

Are the two versions incompatible in either their API's or database formats?

Are any of the consumers middleware libraries that could cause both versions
to be loaded in the same process?

Is either version exposed for use by software built outside of Sun?
(I know previous cases limited them to Sun only, but thought someone mentioned
  this was changing.)

> 4. Other Issues Requiring ARC Guidance
> 
>    4.1 Valid 64 bit subdirectory name
> 
>        We currently install 64 bit packages under the subdirectory name sparcv
>        ie: for BDB 4.2 64-bit we install to /usr/lib/sparcv9/bdb
>        Is sparcv9 a valid subdirectory name?

Absolutely - you can see that's where all the other 64-bit libraries are 
installed on SPARC.   The rule in general is for any shared library, the
32-bit version goes in .../lib/ and the 64-bit version in .../lib/sparcv9 on
SPARC platforms, .../lib/amd64 on x86/x64 platforms.   There's a .../lib/64
symlink to either sparcv9 or amd64 to provide platform independent pathnames.

It usually goes at the end of the directory path though, so for the files 
other than the libdb.so in your pkgmap, we'd normally see
usr/lib/bdb45/sparcv9 instead of usr/lib/sparcv9/bdb45 .

>    4.2 Solaris AMD 64
> 
>        Also we'd like to notify ARC that we plan to deliver BDB on Solaris AMD 64 bit. 
>        Currently, BDB is avilable in Solaris for sparc 32/64 bit and x86 32 bit.

If you'd mentioned you weren't, we'd have told you to do this anyway, so 
that's good.

-- 
	-Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
	 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering