Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1186783471.27681.43.camel@dogma.ljc.laika.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight (Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight
Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Fri, 2007-08-10 at 16:11 -0500, Decibel! wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 09:24:24AM +0200, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: > > Greg Smith wrote: > > > > >http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-next-key-locking.html > > >http://www.greatlinux.com/mysql/books/mysqlpress/mysql-tutorial/ch10.html > > > > I recently covered a related item (prevting phantom rows) regarding > > MySQL in my blog: > > http://pooteeweet.org/blog/745 > > Wait... isn't InnoDB an MVCC system? Why do they need gap locking at > all? Shouldn't they be able to just pull the right version? Is there a document explaining more of the differences between the postgresql MVCC model and something closer to InnoDB or Oracle, where it has rollback segments? I'm interested in the design tradeoffs between the two ideas. Regards, Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: