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

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_exxesolutions.com> wrote in message news:<3F4BDFC1.8A6A6D67_at_exxesolutions.com>...
> Joel Garry wrote:
>
> > <snipped>
> >
> > The whole need for locking stems from
> > this. With multiversioning, you defer the issue until later, when of
> > course, it is too late.
> >
>
> I worked on a system at Boeing back with Oracle 7.3.4 where we routinely logged more than 10,000 simultaneous
> users on a single table. Never had a problem and my colleagues tell me the system is still doing just fine.
> And this is, by current standards, a very small system. Most banking systems, the systems run by American
> Express, Visa, MasterCard, and Amazon.com are substantially larger.
>
> 'Too late' is only an issue if you don't design well. And MVCC works just fine with all of these.

Well, were they all updating the same row? Mea culpa if I gave Guido too much credit for possibly mistyping database when he meant row. I was under the impression he was using MVCC in the sense of "instead of locking at that time" as opposed to the Oracle norm of optimistic commits with the ability to construct a version if needed for rollback or consistency.

>
> When you find a system with a larger transaction volume than that at American Express ... that Oracle couldn't
> handle ... let me know. Please.

Well, a number of years ago I interviewed at one of the large credit agencies. They didn't hire me. A year or so later I read they dropped the Oracle project because it couldn't handle the volume (that big iron was handling). I'm sure it could now... boy am I glad I didn't get involved in that fiasco. Looking at their web site now, I see they can spam 75 million messages a day (per customer? can't parse marketspeak) from their 1.5T db of 150M suckers (_boy_ am I glad I didn't get involved there), but nowhere do they say which db they use...

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.  And now a @#$@!&% brokerage wants to charge me to
not get "electronic delivery" on my 2-year-olds custodial account! 
Even spammers don't have the cojones for that sort of extortion. 
Geez, if they were just smart enough to send links, they have to store
every email they send anyways...