Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Database or store to handle 30 Mb/sec and 40,000 inserts/sec
Here is just one from:
http://www.orafaq.com/faq/RDBMS_Server/Internals/faq503.htm
1, "ITL shortage deadlocks"
2, High transaction activity on tables with bitmap indexes.
Would you like me find and quote more?
I'd say thats architecture, i doubt you would though or is the point where you backtrack and spout some other "factual" information?
Deadlocks can be avoided in any database system by coding properly.
-- Tony Rogerson SQL Server MVP http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials "Galen Boyer" <galen_boyer_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:upslkh02y.fsf_at_rcn.com...Received on Sat Feb 18 2006 - 12:31:01 CST
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, tonyrogerson_at_sqlserverfaq.com wrote:
>>> How does this lead credence to the fact the SQLServer's concurrency
>>> model is somehow on par with Oracle's?
>>
>> I didn't realise I was comparing, I thought I was pointing out Mark
>> Townsend floors in what he stated that Oracle takes care of everything
>> - well it doesn't! You still as a developer need to code for
>> concurrency, deadlocks etc... so trying to flower it up into some
>> magical beast is laughable.
>>
>> Do a google on oracle and deadlock and there is tons of stuff so don't
>> try and pull wool over my eyes. You do get deadlocks in Oracle and the
>> reasons give in the articles I've read are exactly the same reasons we
>> get deadlocks in SQL Server.
>
> Please explain. A deadlock in Oracle is an application bug, only. A
> deadlock in SQLServer is something that cannot be avoided. They can be
> avoided in Oracle. I'm not pulling the wool over anyone's eyes.
> Deadlocks happen in Oracle, but because of poor programming, not poor
> underlying server architecture, contrary to SQLServer.
>
>> I don't understand why you are so touchy on this subject....
>
> Touchy? Not in the least.
>
> --
> Galen Boyer