DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	b=vq8HO64y/obtiI71R9QQ8slSWcB8N8c8DtCukOnzFWKbwlxwlrT3mUhQTbXvClCsse
	6qj1S3+YiXPh1E67P7VLh1AoNb7nXYyBZw0swNznekxyIE7g5ZFg0idLHMwXjD3z5YHh
	SsRSCjFNq46rIlyeKLO8YIxZmrupz8s2irPgA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20100202045701.93A404B1C73@mail175-236.sinamail.sina.com.cn>
References: <20100202045701.93A404B1C73@mail175-236.sinamail.sina.com.cn>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 02:31:30 -0600
Message-ID: <4297a9021002030031k773f25eu8b41c189fac488ec@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: the jokes for pg concurrency write performance
From: J Sisson <sisson.j@gmail.com>
To: wyx6fox@sina.com
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

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...