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
Mmmm - brick wall, talking @.
The impression I'm taking away is that Oracle coders shoe horn the business requirement to suit their engine rather than implementing the correct isolation level inline with the business requirement following the isolations available in the ANSI SQL standard - do you guys actually implement much of that?
-- Tony Rogerson SQL Server MVP http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials "Galen Boyer" <galen_boyer_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:uzmkncj93.fsf_at_rcn.com...Received on Sun Feb 19 2006 - 12:26:21 CST
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, tonyrogerson_at_sqlserverfaq.com wrote:
>
>> You would set the database options (once) to allow this
>> functionality....
>>
>> SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SNAPSHOT
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> Or, if you to wait on update...
>>
>> SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ COMMITTED
>>
>
> [...]
>
> Hm... Even in your database code you are extremely cognizant of the
> database locking issues setting transaction isolation level to some
> snapshot for if you, what?, want a consistent view coming back from a
> query, then, what?, read committed? You have to ask for that? WTF!!!
> You actually have to deliberately ask for the database to only show you
> committed rows? WTF? I thought SQLServer was finally caught up to
> Oracle! Let me ask you one fundamental question.
>
> When would you ever want to read uncommitted records?
>
> There is the question. If you answer nothing else, answer that one
> simple question.
>
>> Anyway, I'm done here; you guys believe what you want
>
> We don't believe anything. We are 100% assured of transactional
> integrity when using the Oracle database server.
>
>> ; the reality is different!
>
> Yes, as always, Oracle remains far ahead of SQLServer in this
> fundamental respect.
>
> --
> Galen Boyer