Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?

From: Florian Weimer <fw(at)deneb(dot)enyo(dot)de>
To: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Date: 2006-05-18 05:18:53
Message-ID: 87u07nuczm.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

* Mark Woodward:

> "On the other hand, you shouldn't use mysql_use_result() if you are doing
> a lot of processing for each row on the client side, or if the output is
> sent to a screen on which the user may type a ^S (stop scroll). This ties
> up the server and prevent other threads from updating any tables from
> which the data is being fetched."
>
> How do busy web sites work like this?

Any system based on locking exhibits this problem. Even with MVCC,
you can run into it if you've got multiple writers. As a rule of
thumb, I never perform network I/O within transactions which update
the database (or "read the database", for systems without MVCC).

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Hallgren 2006-05-18 09:10:51 Re: at JavaOne ... is anyone else?
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2006-05-18 04:18:38 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] One line new items

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Weimer 2006-05-18 05:21:17 Re: PL/pgSQL 'i = i + 1' Syntax
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-05-18 04:45:11 Re: does wal archiving block the current client connection?