From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | nd02tsk(at)student(dot)hig(dot)se |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB |
Date: | 2004-10-25 17:15:33 |
Message-ID: | 417D34B5.1050100@Yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 10/25/2004 11:53 AM, nd02tsk(at)student(dot)hig(dot)se wrote:
> Hello
>
> Harrison Fisk from MySQL claims in this thread:
>
> http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?35,3981,4245#msg-4245
>
> That there are no major differences between InnoDB and MVCC concurrency.
>
> Is this true?
From a functional point of view, the two appear to do the same thing.
The implementation is certainly different and has pros and cons into
both directions. The statement is absolutely accurate and also explains
why Postgres never had any sort of file structure repair tools. I would
even go further in that you don't want to repair any corrupted files, as
those repair operations might introduce breakage of referential
integrity of your data.
Jan
>
> Thank you.
>
> Tim
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
--
#======================================================================#
# 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 #
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steven Klassen | 2004-10-25 17:23:01 | Re: Bug or stupidity |
Previous Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2004-10-25 17:06:40 | Re: Bug or stupidity |