Re: Concurrency in an RDB

Marshall a écrit :

> On Dec 14, 3:22 pm, "Cimode" <cim..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I have never stated that locks put on objects can not cause deadlocks
> > to happen.
>
> So your position is:
>
> 1) There is NO direct relationship between locks and deadlocks.
> 2) Locks put on objects can cause deadlocks.
>
> Well. The More You Know.
>
>
> > A lock is a normal mechanism and is not the real
> > cause of the deadlock problem which lies more on the IO/disk swapping
> > contention of ressources. A matter of perspective, idiots like
> > Marshall will probably not perceive in a lifetime.
>
> Deadlock is caused by disk swapping, you say? You are
> right; I do not see me being able to perceive this any
> time soon.
Deadlock such as response time, are purely implementation adn therefore physical dependent.
Yeah and oh it's Disk/RAM swapping activity not just Disk swapping... If you try to paraphrase what you don't agree with, at least do it right. Moron!

> Marshall
Received on Fri Dec 15 2006 - 10:22:31 CET