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: Heikki Tuuri <Heikki.Tuuri_at_innodb.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 20:48:20 GMT
Message-ID: <oacVb.645$lh.343@read3.inet.fi>


VC,

"VC" <boston103_at_hotmail.com> kirjoitti viestissä news:e1cVb.195950$5V2.1102862_at_attbi_s53...
> Hello Heikki,
>
> "Heikki Tuuri" <Heikki.Tuuri_at_innodb.com> wrote in message
> news:l_bVb.636$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.

it does. Please see http://www.innodb.com/ibman.php#Set.transaction

> > 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

Regards,

Heikki Received on Sat Feb 07 2004 - 14:48:20 CST

Original text of this message

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