Re: [Fwd: MySQL Benchmark page - Problem with vacuum() in PostgreSQL]

Michael Widenius wrote:
> [...]
>
> Some things that I know we have missed in the single user
> benchmark are:
> - Sub select (all different forms of sub select, with a comparison
> to normal selects for those select that can be
> changed to normal selects)
> - Foreign keys (which should contain a comparison with multi-table-delete)
> - Transactions
> - Rollback
>
> With comparison I mean that there should be at least one test that
> makes it easy for the user to see which construct is better for
> this database.

Can we clearify that point a little? Does it mean to define a
foreign key constraint in databases that support it and just
check for the error, but do all the appropriate locking and
existence checks for all operations (UPDATE/DELETE PK,
INSERT/UPDATE FK) on the client side for databases that don't
support it?

Well, especially because of the "appropriate locking", it'd
make much more sense to do it all in concurrent multiuser ...
:-)

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com