Re: vacuum locking

From: Rob Nagler <nagler(at)bivio(dot)biz>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuum locking
Date: 2003-10-24 22:07:25
Message-ID: 16281.41629.69000.492473@gargle.gargle.HOWL
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Mario Weilguni writes:
> of course both approaches have advantages, it simply depends on the usage
> pattern. A case where oracle really rules over postgresql are m<-->n
> connection tables where each record consist of two foreign keys, the
> overwrite approach is a big win here.

That's usually our case. My company almost always has "groupware"
problems to solve. Every record has a "realm" (security) foreign key
and typically another key. The infrastructure puts the security
key on queries to avoid returning the wrong realm's data.

Rob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Nagler 2003-10-24 22:18:48 Re: vacuum locking
Previous Message Rob Nagler 2003-10-24 22:04:39 Re: vacuum locking