Re: Avoiding any locks in SQL Servers - read and understand....itsmagic.

Daniel Morgan wrote:

>Guido Stepken wrote:

>> Hi, Billy !
>>
>> I don't really know, if PostgreSQL, Firebird, Informix, LogicSQL
are
>> phantasy products. The all support MVTO, MVCC. MS and other
database
>> makers haven't understood the great advantage of this technology.

>Another point-of-view would be that the most successful products in
the
>marketplace examined the technology in depth and then intentionally
steered
>away from it.

>For you to assume that the people at Oracle, IBM (DB2) and Microsoft
(SQL
>Server) are less capable of making a technology decision than the
most
>marginal players in the database world is lacking in credibility.

This is an excellent point, Daniel. While one could take the cynical view that they steered away from it to maximise profits with cheap technology, perhaps Guido doesn't realize that DEC was a pioneer in versioning, having worked with it since VMS came out at least, as well as a technical leader in locking strategies with Rdb. IMO in the O V7 time frame, Rdb was much better in this respect than O. IMO, Larry made a shrewd investment picking Rdb up so cheap (only $100M!), and newer versions of Oracle are benefitting tremendously from the intellectual property. Oracle's default locking strategy is perfectly appropriate for business applications, and should not be painted with other vendors strategic problems.

So I think you really hit the nail on the head, and this whole MVCC thing as argued in this thread is reinventing the wheel with some inappropriate spokes sticking out of the tread.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/sun/business/news_1b17buffett.html