Re: Row-level Locks & SERIALIZABLE transactions, postgres vs. Oracle

From: Rob Wultsch <wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Row-level Locks & SERIALIZABLE transactions, postgres vs. Oracle
Date: 2010-05-15 07:22:09
Message-ID: AANLkTinZ_5OgX1y1F8ac6JHMlFXwoBiBAc6Euhl69Xgu@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Oracle, and all other MVCC databases I've read about outside of PostgreSQL, use
> an "update in place with a rollback log" technique.

Have you looked at PBXT (which is explicitly NOT SERIALIZABLE)?

--
Rob Wultsch
wultsch(at)gmail(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2010-05-15 07:51:53 Re: [HACKERS] List traffic
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-05-15 07:20:55 Re: pg_upgrade code questions