Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Avoiding any locks in SQL Servers - read and understand....its magic.

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

From: Niall Litchfield <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 13:02:43 +0100
Message-ID: <3f4211e7$0$15038$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>


"Guido Stepken" <stepken_at_little-idiot.de> wrote in message news:bht0i6$jin$00$1_at_news.t-online.com...
> Hello, Niall !
>
> 1. PostgreSQL high volume servers installations are uncountable. We have
> several servers running 24*7.

And they are running MVTO applications? I may have missed something but I understood that MVTO was not an out of the box thing with postgreSQL.

> 2. Benchmarks i have never tried (see logicsql, which has shown 30-50%
> advantage over oracle in special tests. PCMAG has shown, that MS SQL
> Server 2000 is crap, i give a shit, but i know exactly, when SQL Server
> is poor performing)

Well then PCMAG, if indeed it did say that, is wrong. SQLServer is not a bad product. It performs very well in its target market, and surprisingly well in high volume environments. I'd rather take Oracle but its a case of 2 good products in that comparison.

> 3. Technical Support is not neccessary. Throw away all code in your
> application, which has to do with locking....;-)) You will not loose any
> update, no fear.

That must be part of the 'magic' that you refer to elsewhere then. How very reassuring. I don't believe in magic, I do believe in good design, supportability, maintainability and manageability. Technical wow factor is a very long way down the list. You see I get paid to ensure critical data is secure and available in a reliable, performant manner. I don't get paid by the timestamp on the executables. That's because my business like so many others has a task to do "maintain and manage data and make it available for business processes" it doesn't have a task to count the number of locks in an application.

 > 4. You still think, that locks are needed to prevent mistakes on
> parallel access. Ok, continue to think so

Not at all. I think that serializing access to the same rows is required.

> , developing with stone age
> software, expensive, very complicated to program. I prefer freeware,
> easy to program. What do you think, who will survive ? M$ programmers ?

People who make their businesses run better and who work for well run businesses. That is the way it has always been.

-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
Received on Tue Aug 19 2003 - 07:02:43 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US