Hans-J�rgen Sch�nig wrote:
> This week I have done some performance tuning at a customer's office. We
> have beaten (demoralized) MS SQL and DB2 in serializable mode and DB2 in
> any transaction isolation level :).
>
> By the way: In case of very simple statements SERIALIZABLE is about 3
> times faster than READ COMMITTED. I expected it to be faster but I did
> not expect this difference.
Why was SERIALIZABLE faster? I know SERIALIZABLE doesn't have the
rollback penalty in read-only queries, but I don't understand why it
would be faster.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
