This is a discussion on Re: SUSE port (was [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL 8.0.0 Release Candidate 5) within the pgsql Hackers forums, part of the PostgreSQL category; --> Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when jdavis-pgsql@empires.org (Jeff Davis) wrote: > I almost think to not supply ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when jdavis-pgsql@empires.org (Jeff Davis) wrote: > I almost think to not supply an MVCC system would break the "I" in ACID, > would it not? I can't think of any other obvious way to isolate the > transactions, but on the other hand, wouldn't DB2 want to be ACID > compliant? Wrong, wrong, wrong... MVCC allows an ACID implementation to not need to do a lot of resource locking. In the absence of MVCC, you have way more locks outstanding, which makes it easier for there to be conflicts between lock requests. In effect, with MVCC, you can do more things concurrently without the system crumbling due to a surfeit of deadlocks. -- "cbbrowne","@","gmail.com" http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/multiplexor.html Why isn't phonetic spelled the way it sounds? |