Re: Suggestion for optimization
От | Dann Corbit |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Suggestion for optimization |
Дата | |
Msg-id | D90A5A6C612A39408103E6ECDD77B82920CD19@voyager.corporate.connx.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Suggestion for optimization ("Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
-----Original Message----- From: Jon Grov [mailto:jon@linpro.no] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 12:54 PM To: Dann Corbit Cc: Mike Mascari; Doug McNaught; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Suggestion for optimization "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes: > That's interesting. If Oracle is a MVCC database, how did they > manage to perform ANSI standard Isolation Levels? It seems it ought > to be impossible. There's an excellent introduction to MVCC and snapshot isolation in the PostgreSQL docs. See http://www2.no.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.2/postgres/mvcc.html >>------------------------------------------------------------------ I have read these documents (and some others) now. It seems that there is a serializable transaction level, and so the goal I was after can be reached anyway. So never mind. I am at peace again (and breathing a heavy sigh of relief). But I am a bit puzzled. How can a serializable transaction be performed in a MVCC system? I realize the Oracle does it, and also Postgresql, but I can't picture how that would work. <<------------------------------------------------------------------
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: