From: J Sisson <sisson.j@gmail.com>
To: wyx6fox@sina.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: the jokes for pg concurrency write performance
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 02:31:30 -0600
Message-ID: <4297a9021002030031k773f25eu8b41c189fac488ec@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100202045701.93A404B1C73@mail175-236.sinamail.sina.com.cn>
References: <20100202045701.93A404B1C73@mail175-236.sinamail.sina.com.cn>
2010/2/1 <wyx6fox@sina.com>:
> * joke 1: insert operation would use a excluse lock on reference row by the
> foreign key . a big big big performance killer , i think this is a stupid
> design .
>
> * joke 2: concurrency update on same row would lead to that other
> transaction must wait the earlier transaction complete , this would kill the
> concurrency performance in some long time transaction situation . a stupid
> design to ,
I hear that MySQL can work wonders in performance by bypassing the
checks you're concerned about...don't count on the data being
consistent, but by golly it'll get to the client FAAAAAAAST...
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: sisson.j@gmail.com, wyx6fox@sina.com
Subject: Re: the jokes for pg concurrency write performance
In-Reply-To: <4297a9021002030031k773f25eu8b41c189fac488ec@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox