Re: row level vs page level locking is it more than marketing hype? was Re: Informix vs. Sybase vs. Oracle vs. (gasp) MS SQL Server

Just thought that I'd add my $0.02 to this thread.

Jean-Marc van Leerdam <Jean-Marc.van.Leerdam_at_xxremovexx.ingbank.com> wrote:

Other quotes snipped for brevity...
> In my opinion, to summarize the current status quo:
>
> 1. We all are against a row-at-a-time approach to application design

This is a good point for batch applications. But, OLTP applications usually require very small transaction sets or single rows of multiple tables to be updated. It is rare to update large sets of data (thousands of rows at a time) from a POS (Point of Sale) system.

> 2. We all see PLL schemes perform better than RLL schemes
> (not going into the reasons why...)

Note: This is true on very large data tables with very granular, very well distributed transactions. If an entire table resides within a few pages (lots of very small rows), PLL becomes more troublesome.

> 3. We all see RLL advantages in that it gives a better relational/
> setwise granularity with less unintended dependencies between rows
> in a table.

4. RLL will also produce fewer deadlocks caused by locking of rows

        that are related only by geography within a page.
>
> That will conclude my contribution to this thread (unless ... ;-)
 

-- 
Peaches	  http://miso.wwa.com/~fsgchi 
	  reply to: fsgchi at wwa dot com
What lies before us, and what lies behind us, are tiny matters
compared to what lies within us...	--Ralph Waldo Emerson