[Python-Dev] 2.3.1 is (almost) a go

[Gregory P. Smith]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:01:04PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
> [Anthony Baxter]
> > I haven't been following the spambayes lists too closely. Are there
> > concrete problems with bsddb that are cropping up, or just a general
> > wariness of it?
> >
> > If there _is_ a problem with bsddb, it needs to be addressed. Too
> > many things depend on it.
> 
> Reports of database corruption are common in spambayes.  At least one
> knowledgable tester reported his problems went away after moving to a recent
> Sleepycat release (4.1.25, IIRC).
...
>  They seem to come from non-Outlook people
> using Berkeley for the message info database.  Richie got a whittled down
> threaded test that fails on Windows and Linux, and there's already a
> (Python) bug report open on that; it's not thought to be relevant to how
> spambayes uses Berkeley, though.

Its been my impression that the sporatic bsddb testsuite failures
are BerkeleyDB related rather than anything the python module can be
responsible for (other than the previously mentioned needed improvements
in cleaning up the on disk "temporary" test environment before launching
tests).  For anyone reporting berkeleydb issues, its important to find
out the version of BerkeleyDB they're using and on what platform.

When I find time I want to take the simple test that Richie created,
try it in C and if it still fails there (it should) on the 4.2.xx release
canidate i'll submit it to sleepycat.

The full BerkeleyDB library is unfortunately complicated because it
supports so much more than most people need.

-g