At 11:47 PM 8/15/00 -0300, Jeff MacDonald wrote:
>this may be interesting ned.. and others..
>
>http://www.devshed.com/BrainDump/MySQL_Benchmarks/
He's full of shit the first moment he talks about them always trying
to design fair tests.
Sorry ... I would love to see just one example where DEFAULT
table locking is better (as he claims) - in PG I can of course
lock a table if I want.
I was recently asked to check out an Oracle site that was dying
due to system loads escalating > 70.0 (the decimal point, sadly,
is properly placed). Turns out they were doing by-hand pessimistic
table locking because they didn't understand that Oracle wasn't
MySQL, so to speak, and under load (generating a digest) threads
stacked up (not helped by an Oracle client library bug that causes
weird spinlock deadlocks, not discovered by me but earlier by ardDigita).
Pessimistic locking is available in PG and real RDBMS systems like
Oracle. That's not proof that pessimistic locking is the right thing
to do as not only your default locking but your only locking.
Monty's not fair, and I think most people here know it. They lie,
obfuscate, refuse to update comparision charts to new versions, etc
etc etc.
I wouldn't trust him to pack my parachute, that's for sure.
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert
Serviceand other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.