From: | Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Programatically switching database |
Date: | 2003-11-16 15:22:31 |
Message-ID: | m3u154fidk.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Clinging to sanity, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) mumbled into her beard:
> ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>> My concern though ... wouldn't pgSql server collapse when faced with
>> transaction spawning across 100M+ records?
>
> No. You're extrapolating from Oracle-specific assumptions again.
Or from MySQL-specific assumptions :-).
It seems reasonable (absent of particular knowledge to the contrary)
that the size of a transaction might be _expected_ to be some sort of
constraint; it is quite surprising that it isn't, and I don't think
that's purely based on the mistake of assuming that the whole world
does things exactly like Oracle.
--
(format nil "~S(at)~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/postgresql.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #89. "After I captures the hero's
superweapon, I will not immediately disband my legions and relax my
guard because I believe whoever holds the weapon is unstoppable. After
all, the hero held the weapon and I took it from him."
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yasir Malik | 2003-11-16 16:17:17 | Addition and subtraction on BIT type |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-16 14:52:47 | Re: Programatically switching database |