Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
| От | Jeff Davis |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1106089261.2886.575.camel@jeff обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> Certainly not; ACID was a recognized goal long before anyone thought of > MVCC. You do need much more locking to make it work without MVCC, > though --- for instance, a reader that is interested in a just-modified > row has to block until the writer completes or rolls back. > > People who hang around Postgres too long tend to think that MVCC is the > obviously correct way to do things, but much of the rest of the world > thinks differently ;-) Well, that would explain why everyone is so happy with PostgreSQL's concurrent access performance. Thanks for the information, although I'm not sure I wanted to be reminded about complicated locking issues ( I suppose I must have known that at one time, but perhaps I surpressed it ;-) Regards,Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: