Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
| От | Sailesh Krishnamurthy |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | mjqwtuaxstj.fsf@drones.CS.Berkeley.EDU обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: Tom> People who hang around Postgres too long tend to think that Tom> MVCC is the obviously correct way to do things,but much of Tom> the rest of the world thinks differently ;-) It works the other way too ... people who come from the locking world find it difficult to wrap their heads around MVCC. A big part of this is because Gray's original paper on transaction isolation defines the different levels based on what kind of lock acquisitions they involve. A very nice alternative approach to defining transaction isolation is "Generalized isolation level definitions" by Adya, Liskov and O'Neill that appears in ICDE 2000. -- Pip-pip Sailesh http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: