From: Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large databases, performance
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:09:20 -0400
Message-ID: <20021003170920.X18497@mail.libertyrms.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D9C7579.2010206@cybertec.at>
References: <3D9C8712.9513.9C6521D@localhost>
<3D9CBAD7.23509.A908C61@localhost>
<3D9C7579.2010206@cybertec.at>
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 06:51:05PM +0200, Hans-J?rgen Sch?nig wrote:
> In the case of concurrent transactions MySQL does not do as well due to
> very bad locking behavious. PostgreSQL is far better because it does row
> level locking instead of table locking.
It is my understanding that MySQL no longer does this on InnoDB
tables. Whether various bag-on-the-side table types are a good thing
I will leave to others; but there's no reason to go 'round making
claims about old versions of MySQL any more than there is a reason to
continue to talk about PostgreSQL not being crash safe. MySQL has
moved along nearly as quickly as PostgreSQL.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: andrew@libertyrms.info, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Large databases, performance
In-Reply-To: <20021003170920.X18497@mail.libertyrms.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