Re: Major features for 9.1

This must be the article in ACM-SIGMOD:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1376616.1376690&coll=DL&dl=GUIDE&CFID=16503930&CFTOKEN=26926199
<http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1376616.1376690&coll=DL&dl=GUIDE&CFID=16503930&CFTOKEN=26926199>Which
has a nice abstract, but does anybody on the list have the complete article?

There was also a paper published all the way back in 1997 by the Information
Processing Society of Japan entitled:
"A concurrency control algorithm using serialization graph testing with
write deferring"
Interestingly a Fujii, M is one (of three) authors. I'm wondering if that is
Fujii, Masao of JPug? I'm off to write them now to confirm.

Andrew Lardinois

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>wrote:

> Gilberto Castillo Martínez<gilberto(dot)castillo(at)etecsa(dot)cu> wrote:
>
> >> > when it comes to SSI I am not finding any explanations
> >> > for this acronym.
> >>
> >> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Serializable
> >>
> >> It's about a technique for serializable transactions which
> >> doesn't add any blocking beyond what is present in snapshot
> >> isolation. In contrast, most serializable implementations which
> >> provide true serializability do this by blocking conflicting
> >> transactions. A description of the SSI technique was first
> >> published in the 2008 ACM SIGMOD, with independent confirmation
> >> of some of the published performance improvements compared to
> >> traditional S2PL serializability by an ACM committee. While two
> >> prototype implementations were developed to support academic
> >> papers on the topic, we believe this is the first production-
> >> quality implementation. It includes many innovations which were
> >> not described in any academic papers on the topic.
> >
> > Excelent!
> >
> > The News:
> > It's about a technique for serializable transactions which doesn't
> > add any blocking beyond what is present in snapshot isolation. It
> > includes many innovations which were not described in any academic
> > papers on the topic.
>
> I didn't intend for that to be my recommended "elevator talk"
> summary; I was just trying to quickly explain the feature to someone
> who knew nothing of it. [pause] Oh. [pause] I guess maybe this
> should be my starting point, although I usually like to harp on the
> fact that it allows programmers to enforce business rules within
> triggers or even application code without worrying about explicit
> locking and how this can boost programming productivity, especially
> in large shops.
>
> I'm not sure I can hit both angles in one two-sentence summary.
> Which angle is better? Maybe I could creep to three sentences to
> allow both points?
>
> -Kevin
>