On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 5:41 AM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
I think one of the points that proves this is the chunks of innovative
code that have been put into postgresql that were basically written by
one or two guys in 1 year. Small sharp teams can tackle one
particular
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a statement of fact
with no evidence to back it up. One is quite subjective
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 7:37 AM, Geoffrey li...@serioustechnology.com wrote:
I still haven't seen a post regarding the Oracle scalability issue. Where is
the data??
You mean the PG scalability issue in comparison to Oracle?
--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com
--
Sent via
Scott Marlowe escribió:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a statement of fact
with no evidence to back it up.
The other difference is that I said it jokingly, whereas you (Jonah)
seem to be bitter about the whole
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
The other difference is that I said it jokingly, whereas you (Jonah)
seem to be bitter about the whole matter.
Well, it wasn't clear and I was just in a generally bad mood. Usually
you'd add a :) at the end,
In-Reply-to: 200812220435.mbm4zmd07...@momjian.us
On: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:35:48 -0500 (EST), Bruce Momjian
br...@momjian.us wrote:
I am sure there are smart people at all the database companies. I do
believe that open source development harnesses the abilities of its
intelligent people
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:35 AM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote:
I think that to describe either OS or commercial software as better or
worse is misleading. The most that can be said is that each approach
serves a different purpose and exists in a different environment.
Well said.
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 7:37 AM, Geoffrey li...@serioustechnology.com wrote:
I still haven't seen a post regarding the Oracle scalability issue. Where is
the data??
You mean the PG scalability issue in comparison to Oracle?
Yes.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
Those who
Playing the straight man, I have to ask: Scalability issues with locks
in PG vs Oracle?
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Christophe x...@thebuild.com wrote:
Playing the straight man, I have to ask: Scalability issues with locks in PG
vs Oracle?
(in slow motion) no. Locks aren't something particular I'd
like to discuss, this topic just came from a post upthread.
--
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Oracle on the other hand stores the lock information directly in the data
block that is locked, thus the number of locks does not affect system
performance (in terms of managing them).
I couldn't find any
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:46:15PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Oracle on the other hand stores the lock information directly in
the data block that is locked, thus the number of locks does not
affect system
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:42 PM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:46:15PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Oracle on the other hand stores the lock information directly in
the data
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Jonah H. Harris jonah.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:42 PM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 08:46:15PM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com
Having dealt with cust service for a few commercial dbs, I can safely
say I get way better service from way smarter people when I have a
problem. And I don't have a lot of problems.
Clarificiation: That's saying I get better service and such from pg
users / developers than anywhere else.
--
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
Having dealt with cust service for a few commercial dbs, I can safely
say I get way better service from way smarter people when I have a
problem. And I don't have a lot of problems.
Clarificiation: That's saying
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a statement of fact
with no evidence to back it up. One is quite subjective and open for
debate on
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a statement of fact
with no evidence to back it up. One is quite
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com
wrote:
The difference is HE put forth an opinion about the pg developers
being smarter, but you put forth what seems like a
Hi,
I have a question on how PG manages lock information.
Does this go through a central lock manager that manages the information which row is
locked by which transactioni. Or is the lock information stored directly within the data blocks (so
no central data structure would be needed)
Postgres by default uses the MVCC (Multiversion Concurrency Control,
MVCC) for concurrency control. This is a large topic and may require
more explanation than a simple email response would easily provide.
The well written PostgreSQL documentation has good explanation on this
topic
Thanks for the answer.
I know the concept of MVCC (and the chapter in the manual) and how locks are applied in PG.
What I would like to know how a lock (if it is acquired e.g. by doing an update) is technically managed inside PG.
Basically there are two solutions: a lock manager that stores
Thomas Kellerer wrote:
Basically there are two solutions: a lock manager that stores a map
for each item locked and the corresponding lock. This solution
doesn't scale well, because the management overhead is linear to the
number of locks. This is one of the reasons why one should avoid locks
Alvaro Herrera, 19.12.2008 13:49:
We use an in-memory lock manager for table- and page-level locks. For
shared tuple locks, they are spilled to disk on an ad-hoc storage system
(pg_multixact) when there is more than one shared locker. (Exclusive
locks and single locker shared locks are stored
24 matches
Mail list logo
