Re: Newbie's Oracle 9i impression: it sucks

SQLJoe wrote:

> >But you've still missed the point: I don't want to read uncommitted data.
> >Uncommitted data is data that's in flux for all manner of reasons. All I
> >want to be able to do is to read the *previously* committed version of the
> >data, whilst you are in the *middle* of updating it, without being locked
> >out, and without having to code anything special to prevent the lock out.
>
> Before, a data is committed, is not in flux, the row is EXACTLY as it was prior
> to the beginning of trasaction. Let me say this again, MS SQL perfectly lets
> you read data when the same row is being updated. NO PROBLEM. You seem to
> indicate Oracle can do this while MS SQL cannot, this is simply not true.

Lets see if I can explain this to you in simple terms so there is no ambiguity.

1. I teach RDBMS at the University of Washington.
2. Some of my students are employees of Microsoft and on the SQL Server development team
3. All of them disagree with you.

You can claim what you wish in a usenet group. Being correct is quite another matter entirely.

I would like to suggest that if you are working with Oracle, or have an interest in Oracle, that you post those relevant items to this group. If not I would suggest that you do your posting at comp.databases.sqlserver, in a usenet group where they are on-topic, or at alt.test. This group did fine before you arrived with your abusive and inflammatory rhetoric and would likely not drop into a deep depression upon your departure.

Daniel Morgan Received on Wed May 22 2002 - 10:47:40 CDT