On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 11:03:16AM -0600, Florin Iucha wrote:
> Now, what's [better-than-row-level locking] supposed to mean?
> Attribute-level-locking?
Exerpt from http://www3.us.postgresql.org/features.html
Multi-Version Concurrency Control (MVCC) for highly scalable
concurrent applications:
* Readers do not block writers and writers do not block readers.
* "Better than row-level locking."
* Various row and table level locks are available as well.
Detail found at
http://www3.us.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.1/user/mvcc.html
> Ignore the trolls and use what suits you best. A flatfile if that does
> the job.
Agreed, use what does the job. I'm a huge proponent of text files. I
wouldn't like the Debian system as much if I wasn't. Given a large
dataset, with records numbering in the tens of thousands, a more
scalable solution may be required. Thus, RDBMS's come into the picture.
If you require an RDBMS, MySQL may fit the bill. After having worked
with Informix, Sybase, and MSSQL, I'm used to features standard in
commercial SQL Standards compliant databases. MySQL falls far short
when compared to these. The developers of MySQL say as much.
> Mysql doesn't offer those but it doesn't have the overhead either.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. PostgreSQL doesn't have any
greater overhead than MySQL. They're both "bloated" compared to flat
files. ;-) There are many myths out there about PostgreSQL's speed,
especially when you factor in the improvements to the 7.1 version over
the 6.5. Regardless, the point is moot.
--
Chad Walstrom <chewie at wookimus.net> | a.k.a. ^chewie
http://www.wookimus.net/ | s.k.a. gunnarr
Key fingerprint = B4AB D627 9CBD 687E 7A31 1950 0CC7 0B18 206C 5AFD
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20011107/63f4bb18/attachment.pgp