Re: Informix vs. Sybase vs. Oracle vs. (gasp) MS SQL Server

Joel Garry wrote:

> Anthony Mandic <no_sp.am_at_agd.nsw.gov.au> wrote:
> >Perry Dillard wrote:
> >
> >> I'll admit that page level locking has its place, but row level is
> >> absolutely essential.
> >
> > Since when? The level of locking should be transparent to
> > well written applications. It only becomes an issue with
> > poorly written ones.
>
> No matter how well written the application is, if the page is locked by
> someone accessing a different row that happens to be on the page where the
> row you want is, you won't get it. Telling people to make their records
> bigger so there is only one on a page is a pretty hard sell. Convincing
> programmers to write correctly is like herding cats. Good luck.

	Its the responsibility of the programmers regardless. If they
	were inept and incompetent they'd still produce crap. And end
	users would be quick to notice. Waiting for a lock is the same
	regardless of granularity. Thats why locks should be fast and
	only within the scope of the real transaction. Putting it
	around a select that may or may not eventually create a
	transaction is just plain dumb.

-am Received on Wed Nov 26 1997 - 00:00:00 CET