Re: oracle - mysql comparison

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1090544822.559004_at_yasure...
> D Guntermann wrote:
>
> > "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> > news:1090387704.737703_at_yasure...
> >
> >>Dan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Where was VC wrong?
> >>
> >>>- Dan
> >>
> >>When you respond to what I wrote rather than what you wrote I wrote I
> >>will gladly respond.
> >>
> >> From where I am reading ... you came into a conversation in the middle
> >>and are not tracking on the point I have been trying to make which
> >>relates to point-in-time accuracy.
> >
> >
> > I think you are missing the point. There is a formal definition and
> > criteria for "point-in-time" accuracy in the face of concurrent
manipulation
> > of data. Following from this there is a definition and a criteria for
> > "point-in-time" accuracy that allows for interleaving of transactions,
> > called serializability. Saying "I use multi-versioned read consistency"
and
> > a snapshot in time is not necessarily it.
>
> I think you are agreeing with me whether you realize it or not. But
> perhaps you were responding to someone else.
>

:-) OK.

> Daniel Morgan
>
Received on Thu Jul 22 2004 - 20:49:58 CDT