| From: | Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Ansley, Michael" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za>, "'PostgreSQL-development '" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Inprise/Borland releasing Interbase as Open source |
| Date: | 2000-01-05 01:29:44 |
| Message-ID: | 3.0.1.32.20000104172944.00ed9680@mail.pacifier.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At 05:07 PM 1/4/00 -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
I wrote:
>> Their "multi-generational" concurrency control sure sounds just like
>> MVCC.
>I wonder when they implemented theirs? Basically...is their's based on
>old technology/concepts, while ours is based on newer ones?
Apparently they were formed out of DEC in 1985, with the notion of
doing a "multi-generational" model from the beginning.
I don't know enough Postgres history to answer. Obviously, MVCC
is new but the way that tuples are stored, which made MVCC fairly
simple to implement (for Vadim, at least!), has been part of
Postgres from the beginning.
And, again, my information on Interbase comes from a VERY quick
read of docs and a white paper found on their site, take my
quick-hit analysis with a grain of salt, please!
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-01-05 04:24:52 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: date/time type changes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-05 00:30:37 | Re: [HACKERS] What does explain show ? |