Re: MVCC and index-only read

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: MVCC and index-only read
Дата
Msg-id 22749.1227033982@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: MVCC and index-only read  (Sam Mason <sam@samason.me.uk>)
Ответы Re: MVCC and index-only read  (Scara Maccai <m_lists@yahoo.it>)
Список pgsql-general
Sam Mason <sam@samason.me.uk> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:49:35PM +0000, Scara Maccai wrote:
>> It makes sense to me,
>> but I don't understand is how other databases (such as Oracle) do it.

> I believe Oracle maintains a separate log (not sure how it's structured)
> that contains this information and all the data in both the main table
> and index can be considered committed.

FWIW, I believe that count(*) is pretty slow in Oracle too.  The DBs
that can do it fast are the ones that maintain a centralized counter
of the number of rows in each table.  Which makes count(*) nice and
fast, at the cost of horrendous concurrency impacts for updates; plus
there's no chance of real MVCC operation.  (In an MVCC world the correct
answer for count(*) can vary depending on who's asking --- there's no
hope of doing that with a single counter.)

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Slow queries when ORDER BY ... DESC with table inheritance (no index scan backwards)
Следующее
От: "Joshua D. Drake"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Any risks in using FUNCTIONs (stored procedures) instead of raw sql queries?