Ravi Krishna <srkrishna1@aol.com> writes:
>> Again, pretty much content-free. For all you know some application was
>> creating savepoints, needlessly:
>
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/sql-savepoint.html
>
> I have hardly used savepoints in any application, but if I understand it correctly, isn't it something which is
typicallyused
> in a persistent connection. I wonder how it is applicable in a web based stateless application like Amazon.com,
unless
> even web based application have database level state.
No, savepoints and persistent connections are not necessarily related.
Savepoints are really just a way of managing rollback segments. For
example, if you were doing a large number of inserts/updates, things can
become slow if the rollback segment grows really large. One way around
this is to set savepoints, which will allow you to commit more
frequently and prevent the rollback size from growing too large (there
are other benefits as well, such as allowing other transactions to see
partial changes sooner rather than not seeing any change until after a
long running insert/update has completed etc).
I think that article is really just about headline click bait and lacks
any real details. I'm not even convinced that comparison of Oracle and
PG really makes sense anyway - both databases have their pros and cons.
IMO Oracle is a very good database (though most of the 'add ons' are
less beneficial). However, it is extremely expensive, both to license
and to administer. For certain applications, it would be my first choice
(assuming available budget). However, I prefer PG for the majority of
what I need, partially due to the cost, but mainly because it is rock
solid and much, much easier to administer and sufficient for what I
need. As usual, it is more about requirements than brand and choosing
the right tool for the right job.
Tim
--
Tim Cross
