Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Comparison of PGSQL and DB2

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: josh(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Shashank Joshi <shashyajoshi(at)yahoo(dot)com>,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Comparison of PGSQL and DB2
Date: 2004-03-11 18:39:50
Message-ID: 1079030391.2753.601.camel@camel (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 13:22, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Shashank:
> 
> What follows is my reply to IBM's 2-year-old feature comparison of PostgreSQL 
> and DB2.   Each of the entries is an item that DB2 has and claims that 
> PostgreSQL does not.    I've put my replies to these claims.
> 
<snip>
> 
> > Isolation Levels 
> > (Support all four ANSI isolation levels (UR, CS, RS, RR).)
> 
> I'm not sure about this one; I suspect that we do, however, since MVCC, 
> invented for the Postgres Project, has become a standard for transaction 
> isolation in the database industry.
> 

Not exactly sure which acronyms above correspond to which levels (as I
know them by different names apparently) but we support Read Committed 
and Serializable levels, which are by far the most common of the two
AFAIK. The others as I know them are Read Uncommitted aka phantom reads,
and Repeatable Read, which we do not support. Of course we also supply a
extensive locking methods for further control.   

More info on our isolation levels can be found at
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/transaction-iso.html


<snip>
> > Federated Database Support
> > (Ability to allow applications to access & perform JOIN operations on 
> multiple disparate databases.)
> 
> This is a feature which we do not have because it violates the ANSI SQL 
> Specification.
> 

Perhaps worth a mention that using dblink, you can actually make
functionality similar to this.  I have recently been experimenting with
using views calling dblink functions to create "local tables" that
really live in a separate database on a completely separate machine. I
don't know if I would recommend the technique but I think the
capabilities are there. 

Robert Treat
-- 
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL


In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2004-03-11 18:59:46
Subject: Re: Comparison of PGSQL and DB2
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2004-03-11 18:07:12
Subject: Re: The big MySQL spin

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group