Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: > This week I have done some performance tuning at a customer's office. We > have beaten (demoralized) MS SQL and DB2 in serializable mode and DB2 in > any transaction isolation level :). > > By the way: In case of very simple statements SERIALIZABLE is about 3 > times faster than READ COMMITTED. I expected it to be faster but I did > not expect this difference.
Why was SERIALIZABLE faster? I know SERIALIZABLE doesn't have the rollback penalty in read-only queries, but I don't understand why it would be faster. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
