Re: Anyone working on better transaction locking?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Ron Peacetree" <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Anyone working on better transaction locking?
Date: 2003-04-09 03:58:19
Message-ID: 4096.1049860699@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Ron Peacetree" <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net> writes:
> Unfortunately, the performance of PostgreSQL MVCC in comparison to say
> Oracle (the performance leader amongst MVCC DB's, and pretty much for
> all DB's for that matter) is not competitive.

Ron, the tests that I've seen offer no support for that thesis. If you
want us to accept such a blanket statement as fact, you'd better back
it up with evidence. Let's see some test cases.

Postgres certainly has plenty of performance issues, but I have no
reason to believe that the fundamental MVCC mechanism is one of them.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-04-09 04:14:16 Re: pg_get_viewdef 7.4 et al
Previous Message Shinji Teragaito 2003-04-08 23:53:08 Re: HP-UX 11.22 (IA64) IPF Patch for PostgreSQL 7.3.2