From: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
Subject: | Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB |
Date: | 2004-10-25 21:42:17 |
Message-ID: | 417D7339.7040506@bigfoot.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
>
>>On 10/25/2004 11:53 AM, nd02tsk(at)student(dot)hig(dot)se wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Is this true?
>>
>>From a functional point of view, the two appear to do the same thing.
>
>
> Well, except for one difference. InnoDB will allow you refer to
> tables not controlled by the InnoDB table handler, whereas we don't
> have that problem with MVCC.
From MySQL gotchas:
1) And the same "feature" allow also to start a transaction, mix the two
tables and have a warning only after the "rollback" about the inability
destroy the updates done on non INNODB tables.
2) Create or delete and index or alter a table will recreate the entire
table.
3) Our rollback is a O(1) operation not O(N) where N is the operations
performed during the transaction
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | CSN | 2004-10-25 21:45:57 | copy - fields enclosed by, ignore x lines |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-25 21:08:49 | Re: shared buffers |