Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!rex!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!att!linac!convex!egsner!texrex!rmfowler From: rmfowler@texrex.uucp (Rex Fowler) Newsgroups: comp.sys.3b1 Subject: Re: perl4.003 and ndbm Message-ID: <1991May11.060836.4412@texrex.uucp> Date: 11 May 91 06:08:36 GMT References: <339@kyzyl.mi.org> <1991May8.233806.28719@texrex.uucp> <1991May10.145034.7299@eci386.uucp> Organization: texrex - Personal 3b1 System - Dallas, TX Lines: 24 In article <1991May10.145034.7299@eci386.uucp> jmm@eci386.UUCP (John Macdonald) writes: >In article <1991May8.233806.28719@texrex.uucp> rmfowler@texrex.uucp (Rex Fowler) writes: >|I'm not 100% positive, but I believe at USENIX I heard that Oz's package >|is not compatible with dbm/ndmb/gdbm, just faster. >| >Sdbm, except for an early preliminary version, is compatible with >dbm and ndbm at the functional interface. The only incompatibility . . >You might also look into the Berkely HASH package that Ozan has since >developed with someone Margo Seltzer >from Berkely (hence the name). I believe that it manages to remove ... This is the package I was thinking about, not sdbm like I stated. I never heard a name associated with it so I thought sdbm was it. Anyway, I was under-informed about the compatability issues. I just re-read the winter usenix proceedings and it sounds like it (HASH?) is the way to go. -- Rex Fowler UUCP: egsner!texrex!rmfowler