Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:29:49 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: David Johnston <polobo@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: MVCC snapshot timing
Message-ID: <20131113012949.GA24549@momjian.us>
References: <20131111175737.GA15562@momjian.us>
 <13024.1384202385@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20131111205833.GC15562@momjian.us>
 <20331.1384221575@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20131112021954.GD15562@momjian.us>
 <21328.1384223235@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20131112024609.GG15562@momjian.us>
 <1384226759124-5777852.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <20131112151427.GH15562@momjian.us>
 <1384299361317-5778016.post@n5.nabble.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1384299361317-5778016.post@n5.nabble.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 03:36:01PM -0800, David Johnston wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote
> > We just want to get across the MVCC concept in the intro --- we cover
> > the snapshots later in the document.
> 
> I just think we're being too vague here; and we are covering them in the
> intro with the use of "some point in the past".
> 
> IMO, the main point regarding MVCC is that every change in the system
> creates a new record and causes a prior record to be invalidated at a
> point-in-time.  The combination of these two things increases concurrency
> since you can create new records while people are still using the old ones. 
> One consequence, though, is that it is necessary for the user to decide at
> what point in the timeline they want to view the database.
> 
> Does this sound right?

I still do not see how this fits appropriately in the introduction.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs