Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight
От | Lukas Kahwe Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46BCE175.2060605@pooteeweet.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL: fight
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Jeff Davis wrote: > 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. I cannot give you an exact comparison. But the PostgreSQL docs are pretty good on how things work there and the following article explains how things are in Oracle and the rest: http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?page=ibp_mvcc_roman regards, Lukas
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: