Re: planner/optimizer question

From: "Gary Doades" <gpd(at)gpdnet(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: planner/optimizer question
Date: 2004-04-30 18:59:38
Message-ID: 4092B02A.15469.199EE3DE@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 30 Apr 2004 at 9:37, Kevin Barnard wrote:

>
> I was always under the impression that MSSQL used leaf and row level locking and therefore
> was not a concurrent, in the same sense that postgres is, database. It would still allow for
> concurrent connections and such but updates will get blocked/ delayed. I might be wrong.
>

Ultimately you may be right. I don't know enough about SQLServer
internals to say either way. Anyway, most of our system is in selects for
70% of the time. I could try and set up a test for this when I get a bit
more time.

Unfortunately I suspect that this topic won't get taken much further. In
order to test this it would mean modifying quite a bit of code. Whether
putting additional info in the index header and not visiting the data row
if all the required data is in the index would be beneficial would require
quite a bit of work by someone who knows more than I do. I reckon that
no-one has the time to do this at the moment.

Regards,
Gary.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kris Jurka 2004-04-30 19:48:32 Re: planner/optimizer question
Previous Message Gary Doades 2004-04-30 18:29:44 Re: planner/optimizer question