Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org>
Cc: sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
Date: 2005-01-18 22:29:16
Message-ID: 21286.1106087356@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-announce pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql(at)empires(dot)org> writes:
> I almost think to not supply an MVCC system would break the "I" in ACID,
> would it not?

Certainly not; ACID was a recognized goal long before anyone thought of
MVCC. You do need much more locking to make it work without MVCC,
though --- for instance, a reader that is interested in a just-modified
row has to block until the writer completes or rolls back.

People who hang around Postgres too long tend to think that MVCC is the
obviously correct way to do things, but much of the rest of the world
thinks differently ;-)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-announce by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sailesh Krishnamurthy 2005-01-18 22:42:32 Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2005-01-18 22:10:48 Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Reini Urban 2005-01-18 22:30:09 Re: Some things I like to pick from the TODO list ...
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2005-01-18 22:10:48 Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sailesh Krishnamurthy 2005-01-18 22:42:32 Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2005-01-18 22:10:48 Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)