Sven Mueller wrote:
It is also easier to be fast writing if you lock the
whole table and prevent others from accessing it while you update
things. Slows down reading to stopped while you do a write though.
>>
>>More like stops every other read and write.
>
>
> for as long as the wri
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:41:19 +0100, Adam Stiles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 23 October 2005 18:42, Faheem Mitha wrote:
>> Dear People,
>>
>> I am (unfortunately) trying to install Oracle Database 10g on Debian
>> AMD64. I know this is routinely done on i386, but I'm having some
>> proble
Javier Bertoli wrote:
If you need to update a value in threads.post_count, that NEEDS to
take in consideration what OTHER transactions do on table posts, then that
code shouldn't be inside the transaction.
No, that's not true. We still want our operation to be performed all at
once, or not at
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, in a new attempt to enlighten us, Adam Skutt wrote:
AS> Sven Mueller wrote:
[etc., etc.]
Hi,
Leaving the all-times classical "My RDBMS is better than yours"
war aside (hey!, I have my preferences too ;)...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but...
AS> Consid
Sven Mueller wrote:
Postgresql locks at less than table-granularity all the time.
Fine. I never said it wouldn't.
The point is (and I wasn't clear) is that the locking in MySQL can
become a major gotcha if you're not paying attention in MySQL, while
it's a constant in PostgreSQL.
It is
Adam Skutt wrote on 31/10/2005 18:33:
> Sven Mueller wrote:
>
>>It locks finer than a single column?
>
> MySQL only locks that fine if you're blessed enough not to be using
> MyISAM.
True.
> Postgresql locks at less than table-granularity all the time.
Fine. I never said it wouldn't.
>>Full
Sven Mueller wrote:
It locks finer than a single column?
MySQL only locks that fine if you're blessed enough not to be using
MyISAM. Postgresql locks at less than table-granularity all the time.
Full-text indexes and real-time replication support (or lack of mature
solutions for this) reall
Lennart Sorensen wrote on 31/10/2005 15:41:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Jean-Christophe Montigny wrote:
>
>>Well, I am afraid I'm not quite postgresql-literate, and I live by the
>>(perhaps false) assumption that PostgreSQL and MySQL are more or less
>>the same : open source data
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Jean-Christophe Montigny wrote:
> Well, I am afraid I'm not quite postgresql-literate, and I live by the
> (perhaps false) assumption that PostgreSQL and MySQL are more or less
> the same : open source database projects, except PostgreSQL are supposed
>
Thomas Steffen wrote:
On 10/25/05, Adam Skutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Concerning the tool chain: I noticed (on Solaris, both 32 and 64bit)
that you actually only need a few libraries and a few support files to
compile and run C applications using the OCI. In fact, this works a
lot better f
Jean-Christophe Montigny wrote:
Well, I am afraid I'm not quite postgresql-literate, and I live by the
(perhaps false) assumption that PostgreSQL and MySQL are more or less
the same :
That's a totally false assumption. You'd be better off thinking of
PostgreSQL as "Oracle-lite" as that's wha
Lennart Sorensen wrote:>
Other than live replication and failover and such, I can't think of
anything that I know oracle can do that postgresql can't. Of course I
haven't really used oracle so I imagine there is something (besides cost
you a lot of cash).
It has a whole ton of OLAP and other ana
Thomas Steffen wrote:
I tried that, but gave up pretty soon. The basic problem is that
Oracle is compiled for a hybrid system, that has 32bit libraries in
/lib and 64bit libraries in /lib64. Only a few components are actually
64bit, while most GUI tools (including the installer, IIRC) are in
fact
On 10/25/05, Adam Skutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> More than anything, it's builtin JRE is 32-bits, and it's very hard to
> get it to use anything else.
Yep, that is probably the reason. If you can make a standard 32bit JRE
work, then installing Oracle seems quite possible.
> Note in all cases,
Hi,
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
So that is 'Why no mysql', how about 'why no postgresql' part of the
original question?
Well, I am afraid I'm not quite postgresql-literate, and I live by the
(perhaps false) assumption that PostgreSQL and MySQL are more or less
the same : open source database pro
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:16:08PM +0200, Jean-Christophe Montigny wrote:
> Adam Stiles wrote:
> >The proper way to fix it would be to recompile the whole package from
> >source so it works with your existing installation. But that probably is
> >not an option for you ;)
> >
> >So let's ask a d
Hi,
Adam Stiles wrote:
The proper way to fix it would be to recompile the whole package from source
so it works with your existing installation. But that probably is not an
option for you ;)
So let's ask a different question instead.
What do you need Oracle for that you can't do using Post
On Sunday 23 October 2005 18:42, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> Dear People,
>
> I am (unfortunately) trying to install Oracle Database 10g on Debian
> AMD64. I know this is routinely done on i386, but I'm having some
> problems.
>
> The errors I get appear below, when I try to bring up the installer screen
On 10/23/05, Faheem Mitha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am (unfortunately) trying to install Oracle Database 10g on Debian
> AMD64. I know this is routinely done on i386, but I'm having some
> problems.
I tried that, but gave up pretty soon. The basic problem is that
Oracle is compiled for a hybr
19 matches
Mail list logo
