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

Hello Heikki,

"Heikki Tuuri" <Heikki.Tuuri_at_innodb.com> wrote in message news:l_bVb.636$lh.428_at_read3.inet.fi...
> Ed,
>
> "Ed Avis" <ed_at_membled.com> kirjoitti viestissä
> news:l1smhmj0cx.fsf_at_budvar.future-i.net...
> > "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> writes:
> >
> > >To date, every example I have seen of Oracle failing to handle
> > >serialization properly has required the construction of an incorrect
> > >data model, so I haven't been able to get excited about the issue.
> >
> > To me, this doesn't make much sense. If the database fails to handle
> > transaction ordering correctly (according to the database-theory
> > definition of 'serializable'), then it is not much consolation to wave
> > hands and say this is an incorrect data model. It's a bad data model
> > only because it's a case that the database gets wrong!
> >
> > I suppose it would be okay if on executing the SQL, the programmer saw
> > a warning:
> >
> > This transaction cannot be guaranteed to execute in a serializable
> > order, even though you have chosen the 'serializable' isolation
> > level. Please see the documentation for more details.
> >
> > but it isn't like that, the database is quietly choosing to misorder
> > the operations in two transactions, and that's something I would
> > expect more from MySQL than an industrial-strength RDBMS like Oracle,
>

> MySQL/InnoDB IS an industrial-strength transaction processing DBMS. Wonder
> when Oracle and PostgreSQL catch up ;).
>

Is it some kind of joke ? MySQL/InnoDB does not implement SERIALIZABLE.

> Heikki Tuuri
> Innobase Oy
> http://www.innodb.com
> Foreign keys, transactions, and row level locking for MySQL
> InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for InnoDB which also backs up
MyISAM
> tables
>
>
Received on Sat Feb 07 2004 - 14:38:34 CST