Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Andrew Sullivan
Subject Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB
Date
Msg-id 20041025184221.GB2886@phlogiston.dyndns.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
Responses Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
Re: PgSQL MVCC vs MySQL InnoDB  (Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:15:33PM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 10/25/2004 11:53 AM, nd02tsk@student.hig.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.  So under MVCC, by definition, you can't
have partial transaction failures.  (Or, more precisely, any such
partial failure is a bug in PostgreSQL, but in MySQL it might be a
feature.)

A

--
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant-
garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism.
                --Brad Holland

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Lamar Owen
Date:
Subject: Re: The reasoning behind having several features outside of source?
Next
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: The reasoning behind having several features outside of source?