Re: ACID et al

From: Daniel Dittmar <daniel.dittmar_at_sap.corp>
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 13:30:20 +0100
Message-ID: <dn408s$lls$1@news.sap-ag.de>

vc wrote:
> Daniel Dittmar wrote:
> [...]
>

>>But the database engines still need row level locking (database engines
>>using page level locking were not scalable enough). While db locks might
>>be less relevant in certain parts of the system, they seem to be still
>>very important in others.
>>
>>Daniel

>
>
> Did you read what the OP actually wrote ? He does not need any
> concurrency control as access to the DB is serial.
>

The OP thinks that most concurrency issues are handled better in the application layer than in the database layer. I described an architecture that does *mostly* that. I rephrase 'But the database engines still need row level locking' as:

It is a requirement for database engines used with SAP R/3 to support row level locking. Therefor, the description in my post does not tell the complete story. An important piece is missing for which I don't have the details.

Daniel Received on Tue Dec 06 2005 - 06:30:20 CST