Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?
Date: 2004-02-03 04:30:43
Message-ID: 401F23F3.8080009@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-performance

>>Um, wrong. We don't lock rows for SELECT.
>
> No, but Chris is correct that we could do with having some kind of
> shared lock facility at the row level.

Out of interest, what is it about this particular task that's so hard?
(Not that I could code it myself). But surely you can use the same sort
of thing as the FOR UPDATE code path?

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-02-03 04:43:57 Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-02-03 04:08:42 Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-02-03 04:43:57 Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-02-03 04:08:42 Re: [PERFORM] MySQL+InnoDB vs. PostgreSQL test?