You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It would be great if LMDB Java could be expanded to support that fork as well.
Alternatively, an MDBX Java library could potentially be initiated to support it in parallel.
There is indeed a binding library already available, but it's not as maintained as this one. :)
My view is that such a thing should be a separate project. While mdbx my be similar to lmdb now, it is a fork so may well diverge. It would add unnecessary complexity to LJ for people that are only interested in lmdb as a back-end.
My view is that such a thing should be a separate project. While mdbx my be similar to lmdb now, it is a fork so may well diverge. It would add unnecessary complexity to LJ for people that are only interested in lmdb as a back-end.
Yep, indeed I agree it should go in a separate project/repo.
The idea here was more about evaluating if the current bindings, as well as the additions (e.g.: key ranges), could be easily reused.
Activity
at055612 commentedon Nov 21, 2025
My view is that such a thing should be a separate project. While mdbx my be similar to lmdb now, it is a fork so may well diverge. It would add unnecessary complexity to LJ for people that are only interested in lmdb as a back-end.
cdprete commentedon Nov 21, 2025
Yep, indeed I agree it should go in a separate project/repo.
The idea here was more about evaluating if the current bindings, as well as the additions (e.g.: key ranges), could be easily reused.
at055612 commentedon Jun 8, 2026
It looks like libmdbx is becoming mithrildb and going closed source.
https://github.com/Mithril-mine/libmdbx#mithrildb-and-future
@cdprete are you happy to close this issue?
cdprete commentedon Jun 8, 2026
It's still maintaned, though.