Hi,
On Thursday, March 21, 2002, at 11:39 AM, Ilya Martynov wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 00:40:24 +0100, Bas A.Schulte
>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> BAS> To handle a large number of concurrent transactions in a
> BAS> transaction-safe environment without me having to worry too much
> about
> BAS> concurrency issues and referential integrity I will slowly move to
> BAS> Oracle. $dbh->do('LOCK TABLE USER, INSTANCE, APP_DATA') just plain
> BAS> sucks unless you want to create a very large distributed
> *single-user*
> BAS> system running on multiple machines.
>
> Without changing SQL backend you can have transactions with
> MySQL. Just use InnoDB table type. It is faster than default table
> type for read/write intensive applications because it doesn't lock
> whole tables but provides Oracle style row-level locking.
I knew I shouldn't have mentioned MySQL and it's, possibly perceived,
shortcomings ;)
I know about InnoDB, I know about Postgresql too, it's just that I
really like Oracle for lots of reasons. I have no personal experience
with running MySQL or Postgresql in a high-volume concurrent read/write
transaction situation. It seems most MySQL success stories are about
websites with 98% read-only transactions on the database which just
isn't similar to my needs. I used MySQL myself for that type of problem
and it sure worked.
If someone really wants to do another DB discussion, let's move that to
a different discussion ;)
Bas.
